Institute of Metals Division - Analysis of the Variation of the Diffusion Constant of Carbon in Austenite with Concentration (TN)

Both smith1 and wells2 have shown that the dif-fusivity of carbon in austenite increases rapidly with increasing carbon concentration. Smith has shown, in addition, that part but not all of this increase can be attributed to the concentration dependence of the activity coefficient of carbon in austenite. From the work of Eshelby', it is known that, because of the image displacements, there is a uniform dilatation of the material in a body containing random centers of dilatation. It is thus tempting to explain the enhanced diffusivity as resulting from this apparent negative pressure caused by the interstitial carbon atoms.* That is, the activation free energy for diffusion is not directly a function of concentration if we consider that the alloy is subjected to a concentration-dependent pressure. To proceed with a quantitative solution, it is necessary to determine the activation volume AV for the diffusion process. An exact calculation of AV is quite a difficult problem and does not appear to have been solved as yet. A simpler procedure is to use the semiempirical, macroscopic theory of seyes' which relates the activation free energy AG to AV. Keyes has shown that for many types of diffusion processes the following relationship is valid Where p is the Gruneisen constant and x the compressibility. This relationship is based on the assumption that AG can be identified with strain-energy terms. In general there will also be contributions to AG due to a change in the energy of the valence electrons of the metal; thus the relation must be considered largely empirical. Surprisingly, for self-diffusion where it is well-known that the electronic contribution is quite important,' the Keyes relation works quite well for many systems. For interstitial diffusion where it might be expected that the relationship is on a firmer theoretical basis, the limited experimental data available is not in particularly good agreement as can be seen from Table I. However, it must be remembered that besides the uncertain basis of the Keyes formula there is considerable uncertainty in some of the experimental values of AV. The only real justification for using the Keyes formula in the present analysis is that it gives a result which satisfactorily solves the problem at hand and, further, there are no more reliable procedures for calculating AV available. The coefficient 3 in Eq. [I] is determined such that the room-temperature value for x is to be used. The activation entropy AS is estimated as 8.95 x 10"3 kcal per OK mole using the values in Table I1 and the Zener" relation AS = PAHIT, where p is a dimensionless thermal coefficient of Young's modulus which is to be evaluated at low values of T/T,, aH is the activation enthalpy, and T, is the melting temperature of the alloy. The resulting value of AG at 1000°C is 25.6 kcal per mole. The Gruneisen constant (p = 3cup/XC,), where p is the density, is evaluated from the room-temperature data in Table I1 after calculating C, from the relation. A value of p = 8.32 g per cu cm based on the value of a. in Table I is used. The result is C, = 5.0 x lo6 erg per g, H = 2.32, and AV = 3.41 cu cm per mole at 1000°C and infinite carbon dilution. It is assumed that the activation volume is not a function of carbon concentration. The theory could be refined to consider AV a function of concentration, but due to the uncertainties in the parameters there seems little justification for this. Carbon dissolved in austenite forms a nonideal solid solution, so that in writing an equation for. the diffusivity of carbon it is necessary to take into account the change in activity coefficient with concentration. The resulting equation is16