Deformation and annealing of (011)[011] oriented A1 single crystals

High purity Al single crystals of the (011)[011] orientation have been deformed in plane strain compression in a channel die. Deformation was carried out at a strain rate of 0.01 s−1 to true strains of 0.5 and 1.0, and at temperatures of 25, 200 and 300 °C. The as-deformed microstructure has been characterized using electron backscattered diffraction (EBSD) and X-ray diffraction (XRD). No recrystallization was detected after deformation, and the deformation texture analysis showed that the stability of the orientation decreased with increasing temperature, contrary to reports for other orientations.

Annealing was carried out for various times at 300 °C. Nucleation of recrystallization exhibited periodicity, with distinct bands of recrystallized grains forming parallel to the transverse direction. This recrystallized microstructure has been examined using EBSD. A model is proposed to account for the origin of the periodicity of nucleation and the retention of rods or cylinders of unrecrystallized material after significant annealing times.

Benzene adsorption at the aqueous (011) α-quartz interface : is surface flexibility important?

Atomistic simulations of molecular adsorption onto inorganic substrates under aqueous conditions can be used to guide the rational design of new materials, fabricated using biomimetic methods. The success of such work depends critically on the model used. Here, we investigate the impact of using a rigid structural model of the (0 1 1) ?-quartz surface, over a fully flexible model, on the calculated free energy change in the adsorption of a single molecule of benzene (a simple analogue of the amino acid phenylalanine) from liquid water. Subtle differences in the mobility of the adsorbate close to the surface result in the free energy of adsorption being overestimated by the rigid model, relative to the fully flexible case. Moreover, we find that the distribution of bound configurations of the adsorbate at their respective free energy minima is different between the two models.