Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Modeling dislocation cutting in Ni-base superalloys shows antiphase boundary energy governs precipitate resistance, suggesting improved predictive capabilities.
The exceptional strength of single‐crystalline Ni‐base superalloys arises from the resistance of cuboidal precipitates to penetration by ‐channel dislocations. While discrete dislocation dynamics (DDD) simulations can capture this strengthening, their predictive capability depends on input parameters that are not directly accessible at the mesoscale. Here, we determine the critical stress for precipitate cutting from atomistic simulations of isolated, infinite dislocations interacting with planar / interfaces. Accounting explicitly for internal misfit stresses, we show that the critical cutting stress is uniquely governed by the antiphase boundary (APB) energy, , independent of dislocation character. These atomistically derived parameters are transferred to 3D DDD simulations, enabling a systematic decoupling of lattice misfit, dislocation drag, solid‐solution strengthening, and precipitate strength. The simulations reveal preferential cutting at precipitate edges, which is explained by a line‐tension criterion that locally reduces the required stress. The framework applies to the low‐temperature, high‐stress regime where precipitate cutting dominates. By establishing the APB energy as the governing descriptor of precipitate resistance and embedding it into mesoscale simulations, this work provides a physically transparent and transferable basis for predictive modeling of plasticity in superalloy microstructures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Houllé et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: