Upload
zelda
View
80
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
SFB-761 “Stahl – ab initio” Sub-project A2 “ Ab initio thermodynamics and kinetics” . Contents. Motivation Methodology ANNNI model Explicit approach Structures Results Magnetic phase diagram of iron γ -surface twins Summary. Motivation. Motivation. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Department of Computational Materials DesignDüsseldorf, Germany
I. Bleskov, F. Körmann, T. Hickel, and J. Neugebauer
Impact of Magnetism on Thermodynamic Properties of Iron
SFB-761 “Stahl – ab initio”Sub-project A2 “Ab initio thermodynamics and kinetics”
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 2
Contents
• Motivation• Methodology
– ANNNI model– Explicit approach– Structures
• Results– Magnetic phase diagram of iron– γ-surface– twins
• Summary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 3
Motivation
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 4
Motivation
99% of the passenger cars have a steel body 60-70% of the car weight consist of steel or steel-based parts
Passive safety and Protection from Frontal crash Rear collision Side impact Roll over
Weight increasing
Decreasing of Engine efficiency and economy Environmental pollution
Steels with low weight density high Energy-absorbtion and strength Tend to be mutually exclusive
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 5
Motivation
Material should react only locally to failures induced by high external stress
On the atomic scale this means Changes in the atomic layers stacking sequence
under the stress and gradual twin formation (TWIP) during deformation (“dynamical” Hall-Petch effect)
B.C
. De
Coo
man
, Kw
ang-
geun
Chi
n, J
inky
ung
Kim
Strength + Plasticity
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 6
MotivationAtomic layers shear can take place only if the stacking fault energy (SFE), i.e. energy required to change the sequence in atomic layer stacking, lies in a specific range
A. Saeed-Akbari, et al., Meta. and Mater. Trans. A 40, 3076 (2009)
SFE is the crucial quantitative parameter that characterizes the type of plasticity mechanism in crystalline materials
The idea that changing the SFE one can tune the mechanical properties opens an attractive way to the design of new high-strength lightweight steels
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 7
Motivation
Figure from: J. Nakano and P. J. Jacques, CALPHAD 34 (2010) 167
SFE trends different influence of alloying
elements chemical and magnetic
disorder dependence of properties on
sample preparation and microstructure
Ab initio calculations allowindependent consideration of the influence of different factors on the SFE
High-Mn steels (austenitic fcc structure stabilized by Mn) exceptional mechanical properties relatively lightweight
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 8
MotivationLocal magnetism can influence different properties of a material
Magnetic contribution to SFE
Phonon spectrum in PM fcc Fe,F.Körmann (SFB-761)
Vibrational, electronic, and magnetic contributions to the heat capacity of FM bcc FeF.Körmann (SFB-761)But due to computational challenge, often the simpler NM calculation are performed.
Reliability may be questionable in this case.
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 9
Motivation
The impact of local magnetism on the SFE in pure iron is considered because Iron is a basis element in steels To avoid the influence of alloying elements
Magnetic ordering Computational details
Nonmagnetic (NM)
VASP code; PAW basis set; PBE exchange-correlation functional
Ferromagnetic (FM)
Antiferromagnetic (single-layer)
Antiferromagnetic (double-layer)
Paramagnetic EMTO + CPA code; disordered local moment (DLM) approximation (quasi-binary alloy); GGA exchange-correlation effects
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 10
Contents
• Motivation• Methodology
– ANNNI model– Explicit approach– Structures
• Results– Magnetic phase diagram of iron– γ-surface– twins
• Summary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 11
Methodology. ANNNI model
Advantages Disadvantages Results• Defect-free bulk
structures =>• Moderate computational
costs
• Neglect of local changes of atomic/electronic structure
• Loss of info on segregation effects
• Influence of Carbon on the ISFE in steels
• Magnetic contribution to ISFE in ternary and quarternary Fe-based alloys and steels…
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 12
Methodology. Explicit approach
Advantages Disadvantages Results• Atomic relaxation,• Changes in electronic
structure,• Segregation effects due to
SF formation• Energetic barriers to form
a particular stacking
• Big supercell =>• High computational costs
• Influence of C, H (A9) on the γ-surface in Fe-based alloys…
More general approach with the supercell explicitly containing the defect Shear of one part of the crystal with respect to another => concept of the
generalized stacking fault energy (γ-) surface, where ISF is a particular point (minimum)
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 13
Methodology. fcc = …ABCABC…
Construct the cell explicitly containing …ABCABC… stacking:Face centered cubic => hexagonal with 3 atoms per cell
A
B
C
A
B
C
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 14
Methodology. Supercell structuresNM, FM, PM AFMS AFMD
[111
]
[112]
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 15
Methodology. Supercell structuresNM, FM, PM AFMS AFMD
[111
]
[112]
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 16
Contents
• Motivation• Methodology
– ANNNI model– Explicit approach– Structures
• Results– Magnetic phase diagram of iron– γ-surface– twins
• Summary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 17
Phase diagram of iron
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
NMFMAFMSAFMDDLMNM@hcp
High
-Mn
stee
ls
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 18
Phase diagram of iron
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
NMFMAFMSAFMDDLMNM@hcp
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 19
Phase diagram of iron
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
NMFMAFMSAFMDDLMNM@hcp
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 20
Phase diagram of iron
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
NMFMAFMSAFMDDLMNM@hcp
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 21
Phase diagram of iron
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
NMFMAFMSAFMDDLMNM@hcp
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 22
Phase diagram of iron
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
NMFMAFMSAFMDDLMNM@hcp
>0
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 23
Contents
• Motivation• Methodology
– ANNNI model– Explicit approach– Structures
• Results– Magnetic phase diagram of iron– γ-surface– twins
• Summary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 24
γ-surface of fcc Fe
0 1-0.2-0.10.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Fde
f - F
idea
l, eV
/cel
l
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 25
γ-surface of fcc Fe
0 1-0.2-0.10.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Fde
f - F
idea
l, eV
/cel
l
FMLS
FMHS
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 26
γ-surface of fcc Fe
0 1-0.2-0.10.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Fde
f - F
idea
l, eV
/cel
l
FMLS
FMHS
AFMS
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 27
γ-surface of fcc Fe
0 1-0.2-0.10.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Fde
f - F
idea
l, eV
/cel
l
FMLS
FMHS
AFMD
AFMS
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 28
γ-surface of fcc Fe
0 1-0.2-0.10.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Fde
f - F
idea
l, eV
/cel
l
FMLS
FMHS
AFMD
AFMSDLM
The GSFE surface topology as well as the ISFE are affected by magnetism
Magnetism changes the ISF energetic barrier
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 29
ISF Energy
NM FMLS FMHS AFMS AFMD DLM
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
2TwinSFE
γISF
, mJ/
m2
Absolute value of the ISFE changes considerably in magnetic phases
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 30
Contents
• Motivation• Methodology
– ANNNI model– Explicit approach– Structures
• Results– Magnetic phase diagram of iron– γ-surface– twins
• Summary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 31
Twin Structure ( + magnetic mirror symmetry)NM, FM, DLM AFMS AFMD
[111
]
[112]
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 32
ISF and Twin Energy
NM FMLS FMHS AFMS AFMD DLM
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
2TwinSFE
γISF
, mJ/
m2
The general rule that SFE = 2Twin is fulfilled.The difference is mainly due to the decreasing of the distance between defects in the same size supercell
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 33
Magnetism vs. Chemical trends of SFE (carbon)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
Non-magnetic
AFMD phase
C content in supercell [wt.%]
Ab in
itio
SFEW
ith C
- SF
EC fr
ee [m
J/m
2]
T. Hickel, S. Sandlöbes, R.K.W. Marceau, A. Dick, I. Bleskov, J. Neugebauer, and D. Raabe, Acta Materialia, SUBMITTED
The influence of magnetism on the SFE is not relevant for chemical trends
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 34
34
B
2.2 Å
1.8 Å
(002)
(-111)
Atomic planes mismatch on the twin boundary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 35
Twin in fcc
[111
]
[112]
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 36
Twin γ-surface
[111
]
[112]
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 37
Twin γ-surface
0 1-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8NMFMLSFMHSAFMSmAFMDmDLM
Fde
f - F
twin
, eV
/cel
l
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 38
Twin γ-surface
0 1-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8NMFMLSFMHSAFMSmAFMDmDLM
Fde
f - F
twin
, eV
/cel
l
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 39
Twin γ-surface
0 1-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8NMFMLSFMHSAFMSmAFMDmDLM
Fde
f - F
twin
, eV
/cel
l
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 40
Twin γ-surface
0 1-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8NMFMLSFMHSAFMSmAFMDmDLM
Fde
f - F
twin
, eV
/cel
l
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 41
Twin γ-surface
0 1-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8NMFMLSFMHSAFMSmAFMDmDLM
Fde
f - F
twin
, eV
/cel
l
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 42
Twin γ-surface
0 1-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8NMFMLSFMHSAFMSmAFMDm
Fde
f - F
twin
, eV
/cel
l
Twin γ-surface is not strongly affected by local magnetism except FMHS phase, where the minimum exists.
“Agreement” with exp. => local ordering near the twin boundary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 44
Twin FMHS local magnetic moments
0 12.45
2.50
2.55
2.60
2.65
2.70lo
cal m
ag. m
omen
t, μB
Only local magnetic moments of the atoms lying in the vicinity of the defect are affected
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 45
Twin γ-surface[1
11]
[112]
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 46
AB’ stacking
[111
][1-21]
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 47
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
AB’ stacking
FMFM@AB’
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 48
AB’ stacking
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9-0.25
-0.20
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
V1/3, A/atom
ΔE, e
V/a
tom
local mag. m
oment, μB
FMFM@AB’
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 49
Contents
• Motivation• Methodology
– ANNNI model– Explicit approach– Structures
• Results– Magnetic phase diagram of iron– γ-surface– twins
• Summary
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 50
Summary
• Detailed magnetic phase diagram for different structures in pure Fe (fcc, hcp, AB’) => PM/AFM magnetic phase is relevant for TWIP-steels
• Topology of GSFE surface strongly depends on local magnetic structure
• Magnetism strongly influences the SFE and twin energy in pure Fe
• Topology of twin γ-surface doesn’t suffer strong changes subject to local magnetism changes but
• discovers an unexpected minimum corresponding to AB’ stacking sequence which can shad a light to atomic planes mismatch in twin and matrix observed experimentally
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 52
Thank you for your attention!
FEST-VEK 2013 (MISIS), 21-22.10.2013, Moscow I. Bleskov et al., MPIE Düsseldorf 53
0 1-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8NMFMLSFMHSAFMSmAFMDmDLM
Fde
f - F
idea
l, eV
/cel
l