In materials science, Coble creep, a form of diffusion creep, is a mechanism for deformation of crystalline solids. Contrasted with other diffusional creep mechanisms, Coble creep is similar to Nabarro–Herring creep in that it is dominant at lower stress levels and higher temperatures than creep mechanisms utilizing dislocation glide.[1] Coble creep occurs through the diffusion of atoms in a material along grain boundaries. This mechanism is observed in polycrystals or along the surface in a single crystal, which produces a net flow of material and a sliding of the grain boundaries.
American materials scientist Robert L. Coble first reported his theory of how materials creep across grain boundaries and at high temperatures in alumina. Here he famously noticed a different creep mechanism that was more dependent on the size of the grain.[2]
The strain rate in a material experiencing Coble creep is given bywhere
Ac
\sigma
d
\delta'
D\rm=D0\exp\left(-\tfrac{Qf+Qm}{k\rmT}\right)
Qf
Qm
k\rm
T
\Omega
Coble creep, a diffusive mechanism, is driven by a vacancy (or mass) concentration gradient. The change in vacancy concentration
\DeltaC
C0
\DeltaC=C0
\sigma\Omega | |
kT |
This can be seen by noting that
\DeltaC\proptoC0e\sigma\Omega/kT-C0e-\sigma\Omega/kT
We continue by assuming a spherical grain, to be consistent with the derivation for Nabarro–Herring creep; however, we will absorb geometric constants into a proportionality constant
A
Dv
\DeltaC/(\piR/2)
\delta'
2\piR
Jv=A'Dv
\DeltaC | |
\piR/2 |
\delta'(2\piR)
A'
\piR2dR/dt
\piR2
Jv
\Omega
Jv\Omega=\piR2dR/dt=\piR3
\epsilon |
\epsilon |
=(1/R)(dR/dt)
\epsilon |
C=
Jv\Omega | |
\piR3 |
=ADv\DeltaC\Omega
\delta' | |
R3 |
=ADGB
\sigma\Omega | |
kT |
\delta' | |
R3 |
A' → A
DGB=DvC0\Omega
See main article: Nabarro–Herring creep.
Coble creep and Nabarro–Herring creep are closely related mechanisms. They are both diffusion processes, driven by the same concentration gradient of vacancies, occur in high temperature, low stress environments and their derivations are similar. For both mechanisms, the strain rate
\epsilon |
\sigma
d
d-2
d-3
The activation energy for Nabarro–Herring creep is, in general, different than that of Coble creep. This can be used to identify which mechanism is dominant. For example, the activation energy for dislocation climb is the same as for Nabarro–Herring, so by comparing the temperature dependence of low and high stress regimes, one can determine whether Coble creep or Nabarro–Herring creep is dominant. [3]
Researchers commonly use these relationships to determine which mechanism is dominant in a material; by varying the grain size and measuring how the strain rate is affected, they can determine the value of
n
\epsilon |
~\alpha~dn
See main article: Dislocation creep.
Under moderate to high stress, the dominant creep mechanism is no longer linear in the applied stress
\sigma
log{\epsilon |
log{\sigma}
Dislocation climb-glide and Coble creep both induce grain boundary sliding.
To understand the temperature and stress regimes in which Coble creep is dominant for a material, it is helpful to look at deformation mechanism maps. These maps plot a normalized stress versus a normalized temperature and demarcate where specific creep mechanisms are dominant for a given material and grain size (some maps imitate a 3rd axis to show grain size). These maps should only be used as a guide, as they are based on heuristic equations. These maps are helpful to determine the creep mechanism when the working stresses and temperature are known for an application to guide the design of the material.
See main article: Grain boundary sliding.
Since Coble creep involves mass transport along grain boundaries, cracks or voids would form within the material without proper accommodation. Grain boundary sliding is the process by which grains move to prevent separation at grain boundaries. This process typically occurs on timescales significantly faster than that of mass diffusion (an order of magnitude quicker). Because of this, the rate of grain boundary sliding is typically irrelevant to determining material processes. However, certain grain boundaries, such as coherent boundaries or where structural features inhibit grain boundary movement, can slow down the rate of grain boundary sliding to the point where it needs to be taken into consideration. The processes underlying grain boundary sliding are the same as those causing diffusional creep
This mechanism is originally proposed by Ashby and Verrall in 1973 as a grain switching creep.[5] This is competitive with Coble creep; however, grain switching will dominate at large stresses while Coble creep dominates at low stresses.
This model predicts a strain rate with the threshold strain for grain switching
0.72\gamma/d
\epsilon |
GS\propto
\Omega | |
kT |
\delta'DGB | (\sigma- | |
d3 |
0.72\gamma | |
d |
)
The relation to Coble creep is clear by looking at the first term which is dependent on grain boundary thickness
\delta'
d-3