Phase-field modeling of stress-induced instabilities

Physical Review E - Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related Interdisciplinary Topics

Volumn 63, Issue 3, 2001, Pages

  Kassner, Klaus ^a   Misbah, Chaouqi ^b   Müller, Judith ^c   Kappey, Jens ^a   Kohlert, Peter ^a  

^a OTTO VON GUERICKE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIV GRENOBLE ALPES   (France)

^c UNIVERSITEIT LEIDEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANISOTROPY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FREE ENERGY; INTERFACES (MATERIALS); LATTICE CONSTANTS; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; PHASE TRANSITIONS; STATISTICAL MECHANICS; STRESS ANALYSIS; THERMODYNAMIC STABILITY;

ASARO-TILLER-GRINFIELD INSTABILITY THEORY; LINEAR STABILITY ANALYSIS; SHARP-INTERFACE MODELS;

QUANTUM THEORY;

EID: 0345290219     PISSN: 1063651X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.63.036117     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. V. Ginzburg and L. D. Landau, JETP 20, 1064 (1950).
2. J. Cahn and J. E. Hilliard, J. Chem. Phys. 28, 258 (1958).
3. B. Halperin and P. C. Hohenberg, Phys. Rev. B 10, 139 (1974).
4. J. S. Langer and R. F. Sekerka, Acta Metall. 23, 1225 (1975).
5. A. A. Wheeler, W. J. Boettinger, and G. B. McFadden, Phys. Rev. A 45, 7424 (1992).
6. A. A. Wheeler, B. T. Murray, and R. J. Schaefer, Physica D 66, 243 (1993).
7. A. A. Wheeler, W. J. Boettinger, and G. B. McFadden, Phys. Rev. E 47, 1893 (1993).
8. R. Kobayashi, Physica D 63, 410 (1993).
9. G. B. McFadden, A. A. Wheeler, R. J. Braun, S. R. Coriell, and R. F. Sekerka, Phys. Rev. E 48, 2016 (1993).
10. R. Kobayashi, Exp. Math.3, 59 (1994).
11. A. Karma and W.-J. Rappel, Phys. Rev. E 57, 4323 (1998).
12. C. Caroli and C. Misbah, J. Phys. (France) I 7, 1259 (1997).
13. R. Asaro and W. Tiller, Metall. Trans. 3, 1789 (1972).
14. M. Grinfeld, Sov. Phys. Dokl. 31, 831 (1986).
15. I. Cantat, K. Kassner, C. Misbah, and H. Müller-Krumbhaar, Phys. Rev. E 58, 6027 (1998).
16. J. Müller and M. Grant, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1736 (1999).
17. K. Kassner and C. Misbah, Europhys. Lett. 46, 217 (1999).
18. W. H. Yang and D. J. Srolovitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1593 (1993).
19. K. Kassner and C. Misbah, Europhys. Lett. 28, 245 (1994).
20. B. J. Spencer, S. H. Davis, and P. W. Voorhees, Phys. Rev. B 47, 9760 (1993).
21. P. Noziéres, J. Phys. (France) I 3, 681 (1993).
22. B. J. Spencer and D. I. Meiron, Acta Metall. 42, 3629 (1994).
23. C.-H. Chiu and H. Gao, Int. J. Solids Struct. 30, 2983 (1993).
24. While we have not explicitly included capillary overpressure, we believe it to be automatically present in a phase-field model that is set up thermodynamically consistent. In our model, these effects should appear in a higher-order asymptotic analysis.
25. These parameters are (Formula presented) (Formula presented) (Formula presented) (Formula presented) and (Formula presented) hence (Formula presented) The value for k is estimated as (Formula presented) With these parameters, the critical stress for appearance of the Grinfeld instability is (Formula presented) For the purpose of estimating (Formula presented) we assumed a slightly supercritical stress (Formula presented) and we took (Formula presented)
26. R. H. Torii and S. Balibar, J. Low Temp. Phys. 89, 391 (1992).
27. Note that the concept of anisotropic equilibrium stress is unambiguous, as long as we assume Hooke’s law (27) to keep its isotropic form for an isotropic state of reference. Of course, we could use our freedom in choosing an arbitrary state of reference for the strains to set (Formula presented) But then Hooke’s law would acquire anisotropic additive terms for isotropic strain states.
28. It should, however, be mentioned that the program at that time still contained an error, resulting in an effective stress that was wrong by a factor of about (Formula presented) Therefore the quantitative descriptions of the figures given in 17 are incorrect, even though the qualitative statements remain valid. That we found approximately the right value for the instability threshold was due to our taking an overly large value for the interface thickness (Formula presented) which compensated the effect of the too large stresses.
29. J. Kappey, K. Kassner, and C. Misbah (in preparation).
30. A. Boesch, H. Müller-Krumbhaar, and O. Shochet, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 97, 367 (1995).
31. The precise condition is (Formula presented) where (Formula presented) The inequality given in the main text implies the one stated here.
32. H. A. Bahr, U. Bahr, and A. Petzold, Europhys. Lett. 19, 485 (1992).
33. Q. Li and C. Beckermann, Phys. Rev. E 57, 3176 (1998).
34. D. P. Corrigan, M. B. Koss, J. C. LaCombe, K. D. de Jager, L. A. Tennenhouse, and M. E. Glicksman, Phys. Rev. E 60, 7217 (1999).
35. J. Krug, K. Kassner, P. Meakin, and F. Family, Europhys. Lett. 24, 527 (1993).
36. R. Tönhardt and G. Amberg, J. Cryst. Growth 194, 406 (1998).
37. E. A. Brener and V. I. Marchenko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5141 (1998).
38. P. Kohlert, K. Kassner, and C. Misbah (in preparation).
39. Note that the actual orthogonal coordinates are r and a polar angle (Formula presented) connected with s via the curvature of the interface: (Formula presented) This difference becomes important only when taking second derivatives.
40. J. Müller, Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, 1998 (unpublished);J. Müller and M. Grant (unpublished).