The interactions of deformation twins, zirconium hydrides, and microcracks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• In-situ SEM and interrupted tensile experiments are conducted to study the interactions of deformation twins with zirconium hydrides. • The evolution of deformation fields and formation of microcracks are studied using high spatial resolution EBSD, high resolution imaging and CPFE modeling. • It is observed that { 10 1 ¯ 2 } twins nucleate either before or after the nucleation of hydrides’ microcracks. • It is observed that { 11 2 ¯ 1 } twins nucleate after the formation of hydrides’ microcracks. These twins form when microcracks are parallel to the basal planes of HCP neighbouring grains. • Twins can induce large rotations as well as slip bands within zirconium hydrides. One of the main degradation mechanisms of the zirconium alloys used in nuclear reactors is hydrogen embrittlement and the formation of zirconium hydrides. This study focuses on understanding the interactions among deformation twins, hydrides, and the microcracks that form within hydrides. For this purpose, in-situ scanning electron microscopy and interrupted ex-situ tensile experiments were conducted on hydrided zirconium specimens with favorable initial textures for the formation of extension twins. Electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) was used to measure the orientations of the grains located in the specimens’ gauges and map them into a crystal plasticity finite element model to study hydrides and twins interactions. High spatial resolution EBSD and high-resolution imaging were used to follow the formation of microcracks, and twins live. Although the specimens were deformed to a moderate level of applied strain (∼7%), it was observed that two types of twins nucleate, { 10 1 ¯ 2 } and { 11 2 ¯ 1 } . While the former nucleates either before or after the nucleation of microcracks within hydrides, the latter nucleates after the formation of microcracks and grows with them. It is shown that the formation of twins may contribute to crack nucleation, yet the shear energy density on a given slip system within hydrides is the main driving force for crack nucleation. Regardless of hydride interactions with twins, a significant slip activity is recorded within hydrides prior to cracking.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".