1979
DOI: 10.1016/0022-3115(79)90164-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the sipa contribution to radiation creep

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1980
1980
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…at not too low temperature. In this regime the only dependency comes from the dependency of the bias factors on dislocation density, which is usually considered as logarithmic and is therefore small (Nichols, 1979). We note that similar creep rates during stage II in CW and SA materials are not a definite argument in favour of SIPA models, since microstructures of SA and CW tend to become similar as the dose increases.…”
Section: Dependency On Dislocation Densitymentioning
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…at not too low temperature. In this regime the only dependency comes from the dependency of the bias factors on dislocation density, which is usually considered as logarithmic and is therefore small (Nichols, 1979). We note that similar creep rates during stage II in CW and SA materials are not a definite argument in favour of SIPA models, since microstructures of SA and CW tend to become similar as the dose increases.…”
Section: Dependency On Dislocation Densitymentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Other studies have shown that creep strain rates predicted by SIPA-I were far too low (Nichols, 1979) (Simonen & Hendrick, 1979) (Kishimoto, et al, 1988). The difficulty, while assessing the magnitude of SIPA-I creep, is to use the correct value for the fraction of freely migrating defects which are the only ones to participate to creep strain in SIPA models (Nichols, 1979), and to use correct values for defect polarizabilities. A recent study based on cluster dynamics confirmed the too low magnitude of SIPA-I effect .…”
Section: Stress Dependency and Magnitudementioning
confidence: 99%
“…By inserting the concentration profiles given by (18) into (24) and performing the corresponding derivatives and integrals, the following result is obtained for the strength: The sink strengths derived by Woo and Gosele [16] for the boundary conditions (2b), with the concentration profiles being given by (20), can also be written as (25). I n this case a simpler form is derived for q(qi, q,), namely ' From the definition of qi and q,, (14), and (15) it is evident that, independently of the boundary conditions under considoration, the hollow cylinder sink strengths given by (26) The hollow cylinder sink strengths given by (25) t o (27) are plotted in Fig. 2 for each set of boundary conditions and using parametric values of /?.…”
Section: Dislocation Sink Strengthmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 °C) at 1300 oc (19). The 0/U ratios of samples [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] (molybdenum encapsulated) and [9][10][11][12] (ttmgsten encapsulated) were 1. 996 and 1.…”
Section: B Isothermal Sihteringmentioning
confidence: 99%