Simplified Kinetic Model of Flux-Driven Phase Transitions and Patterns Competition in Open 2D System

Authors

  • A.M. Gusak The Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University of Cherkasy, Ensemble3 Centre of Excellence
  • S.O. Abakumov The Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University of Cherkasy

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15407/ujpe70.4.271

Keywords:

open system, flux-driven transformation, spinodal decomposition, pattern formation, rate-dependent phase diagram, hysteresis

Abstract

The regular solution approximation has a successful history of applications in the thermodynamics and kinetics of decomposition in alloys, treated as closed systems. It provides a qualitatively proper description of all stages of spinodal and nucleation-mediated decomposition for alloys under homogeneous external conditions without external fluxes. In this article, the kinetic mean-field model for open (flux-driven) systems is extended by incorporating the divergence of in- and out-fluxes into the master equations for occupation probabilities. The closest experimental analog of this model is the pattern formation during the co-deposition of a binary alloy under frozen bulk diffusion, but with reasonable surface diffusion, where the deposition rate V serves as the main external parameter. However, some peculiarities of the model may also be useful for describing eutectic and off-eutectic crystallizations. Rate-dependent phase T − C diagrams are determined for the steady the states of such an open system. The ratedependent instability region is subdivided into three distinct steady-state morphologies: spots (“gepard”-like), layers (“zebra”-like) – labyrinth or lamellae, and mixed patterns (a combination of “gepard” and “zebra”). This morphology map depends on the initial conditions, revealing memory effects and hysteresis. This implies that, unlike the equilibrium state of a closed system, which acts as an attractor for the evolution paths, the steady states of flux-driven systems may not be attractors. Variations of the model, including Monte Carlo simulations, are also discussed.

References

1. M. Henkel, H. Hinrichsen, S. L¨ubeck. Non-Equilibrium Phase Transitions. Vol. 1. Absorbing Phase Transitions (Springer, 2008).

2. G. Martin, P. Bellon. Radiation effects in concentrated alloys and compounds: equilibrium and kinetics of driven systems. Comptes Rendus Physique 9 (3-4), 323 (2008).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crhy.2007.11.006

3. Y. Ashkenazy, N.Q. Vo, D. Schwen, R.S. Averback, P. Bellon. Shear induced chemical mixing in heterogeneous systems. Acta Materialia 60 (3), 984 (2012).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2011.11.014

4. B.B. Straumal, A.S. Gornakova, O.B. Fabrichnaya, M.J. Kriegel, A.A. Mazilkin, B. Baretzky, S.V. Dobatkin. Effective temperature of high pressure torsion in Zr-Nb alloys. High Temperature Materials and Processes 31 (4-5), 339 (2012).

https://doi.org/10.1515/htmp-2012-0057

5. S.G. Brush. History of the Lenz-Ising model. Rev. Mod. Phys. 39 (4), 883 (1967).

https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.39.883

6. G. Martin. Atomic mobility in CahnпїЅs diffusion model. Phys. Rev. B 41 (4), 2279 (1990).

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.41.2279

7. Z. Erd'elyi, I.A. Szab'o, D.L. Beke. Interface sharpening instead of broadening by diffusion in ideal binary alloys. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (16), 165901 (2002).

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.165901

8. D.L. Beke, Z. Erd'elyi. Resolution of the diffusional paradox predicting infinitely fast kinetics on the nanoscale. Phys. Rev. B 73 (3), 035426 (2006).

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.73.035426

9. Z. Erd'elyi, M. Pasichnyy, V. Bezpalchuk, J.J. Tom'an, B. Gajdics, A.M. Gusak. Stochastic kinetic mean field model. Computer Phys. Commun. 204, 31 (2016).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2016.03.003

10. T.V. Zaporozhets, A. Taranovskyy, G. J'ager, A.M. Gusak, Z. Erd'elyi, J.J. Tom'an. The effect of introducing stochasticity to kinetic mean-field calculations: Comparison with lattice kinetic Monte-Carlo in case of regular solid solutions. Comput. Mater. Sci. 171, 109251 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2019.109251

11. B. Gajdics, J.J. Tom'an, H. Zapolsky, Z. Erd'elyi, G. Demange. A multiscale procedure based on the stochastic kinetic mean field and the phase-field models for coarsening. J. Appl. Phys. 126 (6), 065106 (2019).

https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5099676

12. A. Gusak, T. Zaporozhets, N. Storozhuk. Phase competition in solid-state reactive diffusion revisited - Stochastic kinetic mean-field approach. J. Chem. Phys. 150 (17), 174109 (2019).

https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5086046

13. A. Titova, H. Zapolsky, A. Gusak. Memory effects during co-deposition of binary alloys. Scripta Materialia 241, 115897 (2024).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115897

14. Y. Lu, B. Derby, H. Sriram, K. Kadirvel, C. Wang, X. Liu, Y. Wang. Microstructure development and morphological transition during deposition of immiscible alloy films. Acta Materialia 220, 117313 (2021).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2021.117313

15. M. Powers, J.A. Stewart, R. Dingreville, B.K. Derby, A. Misra. Compositionally-driven formation mechanism of hierarchical morphologies in co-deposited immiscible alloy thin films. Nanomaterials 11 (10), 2635 (2021).

https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11102635

16. S. Akamatsu, S. Bottin-Rousseau, M. ¸Serefo˘glu, V.T. Witusiewicz, U. Hecht, M. Plapp. In situ experiments in microgravity and phase-field simulations of the lamellar-torod transition during eutectic growth. Comptes Rendus. M'ecanique 351 (S2), 1 (2023).

https://doi.org/10.5802/crmeca.142

17. S. Bottin-Rousseau, V.T. Witusiewicz, U. Hecht, J. Fernandez, A. Laveron-Simavilla, S. Akamatsu. Coexistence of rod-like and lamellar eutectic growth patterns. Scripta Materialia 207, 114314 (2022).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2021.114314

18. M. ¸Serefo˘glu, S. Bottin-Rousseau, S. Akamatsu. Lamellarod pattern transition and confinement effects during eutectic growth. Acta Materialia 242, 118425 (2023).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2022.118425

19. L. R'atkai, G.I. T'oth, L. K¨ornyei, T. Pusztai, L. Gr'an'asy. Phase-field modeling of eutectic structures on the nanoscale: The effect of anisotropy. J. Mater. Sci. 52, 5544 (2017).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-017-0853-8

20. A. Gusak, A. Titova. Eutectic crystallization and melting in sharp concentration gradients. J. Chem. Phys. 158 (16), (2023).

https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0147658

21. M. Atzmon, D.A. Kessler, D.J. Srolovitz. Phase separation during film growth. J. Appl. Phys. 72 (2), 442 (1992).

https://doi.org/10.1063/1.351872

22. J.W. Cahn, J.E. Hilliard. Free energy of a nonuniform system. I. Interfacial free energy. J. Chem. Phys. 28 (2), 258 (1958).

https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1744102

23. A.A. Vlasov. Theory of Many Particles (Gostekhizdat, 1950).

24. A.G. Khachaturyan. Theory of Structural Transformations in Solids (Courier Corporation, 2013).

25. A.S. Shirinyan, A.M. Gusak. Phase diagrams of decomposing nanoalloys. Philosophical Magazine 84 (6), 579 (2004).

https://doi.org/10.1080/14786430310001635431

26. A.S. Shirinyan, A.M. Gusak, M. Wautelet. Phase diagram versus diagram of solubility: What is the difference for nanosystems? Acta Mater. 53 (19), 5025 (2005).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2005.07.014

27. A.M. Gusak, A.O. Kovalchuk, B.B. Straumal. Interrelation of depletion and segregation in decomposition of nanoparticles. Philosophical Magazine 93 (14), 1677 (2013).

https://doi.org/10.1080/14786435.2012.753481

Published

2025-04-25

Issue

Section

Surface physics

How to Cite

Simplified Kinetic Model of Flux-Driven Phase Transitions and Patterns Competition in Open 2D System. (2025). Ukrainian Journal of Physics, 70(4), 271. https://doi.org/10.15407/ujpe70.4.271