2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.01.118
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simulating hydrogen in fcc materials with discrete dislocation plasticity

Abstract: We have performed discrete dislocation plasticity simulations of hydrogen charged microcantilever bend tests on an fcc material at realistic hydrogen concentrations. This was achieved by accounting for the near-core solute-solute interactions which was found to reduce the dislocation nucleation time and stress. Dislocation pile-ups were observed at the neutral mid plane of the cantilever, and hydrogen was found to increase the number of dislocations in the pile-ups. Meanwhile, hydrogen was observed to decrease… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 57 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is a vast literature devoted to shed light into the physical mechanisms behind hydrogen embrittlement [6][7][8][9][10][11], and to develop mechanistic predictive models that can prevent failures and map safe regimes of operation [12][13][14][15][16]. The vast majority of the computational models developed for predicting hydrogen assisted cracking fall into two categories: (i) discrete methods, such as cohesive zone models [17][18][19][20], and (ii) diffuse approaches, such as phase field or other non-local damage models [21][22][23][24][25][26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is a vast literature devoted to shed light into the physical mechanisms behind hydrogen embrittlement [6][7][8][9][10][11], and to develop mechanistic predictive models that can prevent failures and map safe regimes of operation [12][13][14][15][16]. The vast majority of the computational models developed for predicting hydrogen assisted cracking fall into two categories: (i) discrete methods, such as cohesive zone models [17][18][19][20], and (ii) diffuse approaches, such as phase field or other non-local damage models [21][22][23][24][25][26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%