Paper detail

The Peierls--Nabarro FE model in two-phase microstructures -- a comparison with atomistics

This paper evaluates qualitatively as well as quantitatively the accuracy of a recently proposed Peierls--Nabarro Finite Element (PN-FE) model for dislocations by a direct comparison with an equivalent molecular statics simulation. To this end, a two-dimensional microstructural specimen subjected to simple shear is considered, consisting of a central soft phase flanked by two hard-phase regions. A hexagonal atomic structure with equal lattice spacing is adopted, the interactions of which are described by the Lennard--Jones potential with phase specific depths of its energy well. During loading, edge dislocation dipoles centred in the soft phase are introduced, which progress towards the phase boundaries, where they pile up. Under a sufficiently high external shear load, the leading dislocation is eventually transmitted into the harder phase. The homogenized PN-FE model is calibrated to an atomistic model in terms of effective elasticity constants and glide plane properties as obtained from simple uniform deformations. To study the influence of different formulations of the glide plane potential, multiple approaches are employed, ranging from a simple sinusoidal function of the tangential disregistry to a complex model that couples the influence of the tangential and the normal disregistries. The obtained results show that, qualitatively, the dislocation structure, displacement, strain fields, and the dislocation evolution are captured adequately. The simplifications of the PN-FE model lead, however, to some discrepancies within the dislocation core. Such discrepancies play a dominant role in the dislocation transmission process, which thus cannot quantitatively be captured properly. Despite its simplicity, the PN-FE model proves to be an elegant tool for a qualitative study of edge dislocation behaviour in two-phase microstructures, although it may not be quantitatively predictive.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.