A Mineralogical Study of a Dravitic Tourmaline from the Grenville Province

Tourmaline from a gem-quality deposit in the Grenville province has been studied with X-ray diffraction, visible-near infrared spectroscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, electron microprobe and optical measurements. The tourmaline is found within tremolite-rich calc-silicate pods hosted in marble of the Central Metasedimentary Belt. The crystals are greenish-greyish-brown and have yielded facetable material up to 2.09 carats in size. Using the classification of Henry et al. 2011 the tourmaline is classified as a dravite, with a representative formula shown to be (Na0.73Ca0.2380.032)(Mg2+2.913Fe2+0.057Ti4+0.030) (Al3+5.787Fe3+0.017Mg2+0.14)(Si6.013O18)(BO3)3(OH)3((OH,O)0.907F0.093). Rietveld analysis of powder diffraction data gives a = 15.9436(8) Å, c = 7.2126(7) Å and a unit cell volume of 1587.8 Å3. A polished thin section was cut perpendicular to the c-axis of one tourmaline crystal, which showed zoning from a dark brown core into a lighter rim into a thin darker rim and back into lighter zonation. Through the geochemical data, three key stages of crystal growth can be seen within this thin section. The first is the core stage which occurs from the dark core to the first colourless zone; the second is from this colourless zone increasing in brown colour to the outer limit before a sudden absence of colour is noted; the third is a sharp change from the end of the second and is entirely colourless. These events are the result of metamorphism and hydrothermal fluids resulting from nearby felsic intrusive plutons. Scanning electron microscope, and electron microprobe traverses across this cross-section revealed that the green colour is the result of iron present throughout the system while the brown colour is correlated with titanium content. Crystal inclusions in the tourmaline of chlorapatite, and zircon were identified by petrographic analysis and confirmed using scanning electron microscope data and occur within the third stage of formation.

Yielding Behaviour of Electron Beam Lithography and Focused Ion Beam Made Nanocrystalline Micro/Nanopillars

Electron beam lithography (EBL) and focused ion beam (FIB) methods were developed in house to fabricate nanocrystalline nickel micro/nanopillars so to compare the effect of fabrication on plastic yielding. EBL was used to fabricate 3 μm and 5 μm thick poly-methyl methacrylate patterned substrates in which nickel pillars were grown by electroplating with height to diameter aspect ratios from 2:1 to 5:1. FIB milling was used to reduce larger grown pillars to sizes similar to EBL grown pillars. X-ray diffraction, electron back-scatter diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, and FIB imaging were used to characterize the nickel pillars. The measured grain size of the pillars was 91±23 nm, with strong <110> and weaker <111> and <110> crystallographic texture in the growth. Load-controlled compression tests were conducted using a MicroMaterials nano-indenter equipped with a 10 μm flat punch at constant rates from 0.0015 to 0.03 mN/s on EBL grown pillars, and 0.0015 and 0.015 mN/s on FIB-milled pillars. The measured Young’s modulus ranged from 55 to 350 GPa for all pillars, agreeing with values in the literature. EBL grown pillars exhibited stochastic strain-bursts at slow loading rates, attributed to local micro yield events, followed by work hardening. Sharp yield points were also observed and attributed to the gold seed layer de-bonding between the nickel pillar and substrate due to the shear stress associated with end effects that arise from the substrate constraint. The onset of yield ranged from 108 to 1800 MPa, which is greater than bulk nickel, but within values given in the literature. FIB-milled pillars demonstrated stochastic yield behaviour at all loading rates tested, yielding between 320 and 625 MPa. Deformation was apparent at FIB-milled pillar tops, where the smallest cross-sectional area was measured, but still exhibited superior yield strength to bulk nickel. The gallium damage at the outer surface of the pillars likely aids in dislocation nucleation and plasticity, leading to lower yield strengths than for the EBL pillars. Thermal drift, substrate effects, and noise due to vibrations within the indenter system contributed to variance and inconsistency in the data.