 |
Let's consider a close packed
lattice, and look at the close packed planes. |
|
 |
In a simple model using perfect
spheres we have the following situation: |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
We take the blue atoms as the base plane
for what we are going to built on it, we will call it the "A - plane". |
 |
 |
The next layer will have the center of the atoms
right over the depressions of the A -
plane; it could be either the B - or
C - configuration. |
 |
Here the pink layer is in the "B" position |
 |
 |
If you pick the B - configuration (and whatever you pick at this
stage, we can always call it the B - configuration), the third layer can
either be directly over the A - plane and
then is also an A - plane (shown for one
atom), or in the C - configuration. |
 |
If you chose "A"; you obtain the
hexagonal close packed lattice (hcp), if you chose
"C", you get the
face centered cubic lattice
(fcc) |
 |
 |
You can't have it both ways. If you start in the
C position somewhere (in the picture the
green atoms) and on the A position
somewhere else (light blue), you will get a problem as soon as the two layers
meet. |
 |
For varieties sake, and to be able to
distinguish the layers better, the bottom A
layer here is in dark blue. |
|
|
|
|
 |
The stacking sequences of the two
close-packed lattices therefore are |
|
 |
fcc: ABCABCABCA... |
|
 |
hcp: ABABABA... |
 |
Looking at this sequences in
cross-section is a bit more involved; it is best done in a
<110> projection
of the fcc lattice |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Planes with the same letter are on lines
perpendicular to the {111} planes, as indicated by thin black lines.
|
 |
The projection of the elementary cell is shown with
red lines. |
|
|
 |
We now remove parts of a
horizontal {111} plane - e.g. by agglomeration of vacancies on that
plane - it shall be a C-plane here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Now A and C- planes become neighbors and relax into the
configuration shown. |
 |
We produced a stacking fault because the stacking sequence
ABCABCA..
has been changed to the faulty sequence ABCABABCA...
The stacking fault is between the large letters. |
 |
Stacking faults by themselves are simple
two-dimensional defects. They carry a certain stacking fault energy g; very roughly around a few 100
mJ/m2. |
 |
The disc of vacancies obviously is bordered by an edge dislocation. What is the Burgers vector of this
dislocation? We shall see farther down. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
If we do not condense vacancies on a plane, but fill in a disc of
agglomerated interstitials, we obtain the
following structure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The stacking sequence ABCABCA... again is faulty; it
is now ABCABACABCA... .
The stacking fault is between the large letters. |
|
|
 |
This is a different
kind of stacking fault than the one from above. |
|
|
 |
For historical reasons, we call the stacking fault produced by
vacancy agglomeration "intrinsic
stacking fault" and the stacking fault produced by interstitial
agglomeration "extrinsic stacking
fault". |
|
|
 |
The extrinsic stacking fault also seems to be bordered by an
edge dislocation. Again, what is the Burgers vector? |
|
|
|
 |
In order to determine the Burgers
vector of the apparent dislocations bordering the stacking faults, we must do a
Burgers circuit or use the Volterra
definition. For this we must first be clear about the directions in the chosen
projection. This is shown below. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
Directions in the
<110> projection
shown for the elementary cell traced out on the right or above |
Traces of the (color-coded) planes (right angle to direction)
in the <110> projection and the elementary cell. |
|
|
|
 |
From a Burgers circuit or from a
Voltaterra cut, we obtain the same result (Try it! It is easier in this case to
hop from atom to atom (instead from lattice point to lattice point); start at
the stacking fault). |
|
 |
The Burgers vector of these
dislocations is b = ± a/3 <111> - and
this is not a translation vector of the fcc - lattice! Do
not, at this point, forget the
distinction between
lattice and crystal! |
|
 |
Dislocations with Burgers vectors of
this type are called partial
dislocations, or more correctly, Frank partial dislocations, or simply
Frank dislocations. |
 |
This brings us to a general
definition:
Dislocations with Burgers vector that are not translation vectors of the lattice are called
partial dislocations. They must by
necessity border a two-dimensional defect, usually a stacking fault.
|
|
 |
This can be verified with the
Volterra construction if we
add one element: Make a cut in a {111} plane and shift by
a/3<111> perpendicular to the plane. The element added is that we
now include shift vectors that are not
translation vectors of the lattice, but
vectors between equivalent positions of the
atoms. |
|
 |
Partial Burgers vectors and stacking faults thus
may exist if the packing of atoms defining the crystal has additional
symmetries not found in the lattice. Check
this advanced
module for an elaboration. |
|
 |
As stated in the
definition of the Volterra
cut-shift-weld procedure, you now must add or remove material. The total effect
is the creation of a Frank partial along the cut line and, by necessity, a
stacking fault on the cut part of the {111} plane. |
 |
We also see now that the primary
defects which are generated by the agglomeration of intrinsic point defects in
fcc lattices are small "stacking
fault loops". |
|
|
|
 |
Now we may ask a question: Can we
produce stacking faults without the participation of
point defects? Indeed, we may - use the
Volterra definition to see
how: |
|
 |
Make a cut on a
{111} plane, e.g. between the A- and B-plane. |
|
 |
Move the B-plane so it is now
in a C-position. No material must be removed or added. |
|
 |
Weld together: You now have the
stacking sequence ABCACABCA... instead of ABCABCA.., i.e. you
produced the stacking sequence of an intrinsic stacking fault. |
 |
The vector of the shift must be the
Burgers vector of the partial dislocation resulting from this operation as the
boundary of the intrinsic stacking fault. This shift vector can be seen by
projecting the elementary cell on the close packed {111} plane where we
did the cut. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
The displacement vectors
for producing stacking faults
with the Volterra construction.
We have all vectors pointing
from one "dent" to a neighboring one. |
The directions in the {111} plane.
If you superimpose the two red circles,
you have the projection shown on the left. |
Each one of the red vectors would
move a {111} plane from
an A-position to a B position
(marked by a green dot). |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The relevant displacement vectors are
of the type b = a/6<112>. (Check it! It's good exercise for
getting used to lattice projections). Dislocations with this kind of Burgers
vector are called Shockley partial dislocations, Shockley
dislocations, or simply Shockley
partials. |
|
 |
In our
<110> projection, Shockley and Frank partials look like this
(after a picture from "Hull and Bacon"). The pictures are
drawn in a slightly different style, to make things a bit more complicated (get
used to it!) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
You can't quite see the Shockley
dislocation? Well, neither can I. But it is time to get used to the fact that
not all dislocations are edge dislocation, clearly visible in schematic
drawings. We will encounter dislocations that are far weirder and almost
impossible to "see" in a drawing, or hard to draw at all. But
nevertheless they exist, possess a stress- and strain field described by the
formulas from before, and are just the
real world inside crystals. |
 |
By now you are wondering if these
partial dislocations are an invention of bored professors? Well, they are not! They are more or less the
only kind of dislocations that really exist
in fcc crystals (and some others)! |
|
 |
The reason for this is that perfects
dislocations (with a Burgers vector of the type a/2<110>, i.e. a
lattice translation vector) will dissociate to form
partial dislocations. This is one kind of a possible reaction
involving partial dislocations, which we are going to study in the next
subchapter. |
| |
|
|
© H. Föll (Defects - Script)