Institute of Metals Division - Misfit Strain Energy in the Au-Cu System

IN solid solutions atoms of differing sizes occupy the same crystalline lattice, requiring that some of them be compressed and others expanded. The energy involved has been called misfit strain energy and is an important concept of crystal chemistry. If the atomic sizes and elastic constants of interatomic bonds are known, the misfit energy may be calculated,' provided certain simplifying assumptions are allowable. Usually, isotropic crystals are assumed and interatomic distances are taken to be the statistical average determined from X-ray diffraction. Such calculations yield values of the misfit energy of the order of 1 or 2 kcal per atom in alloys such as Au-Cu at compositions of 50 atomic pct. However, evidence has accumulated in recent times that atoms change their sizes with composition of alloys, implying electronic rearrangement of the bonds. The size changes have been found particularly by application of the X-ray method developed by Warren, Averbach, and Roberts.' Thus, Averbach, Flinn, and Cohen3 determined radii in Au-Cu alloys. Oriani4 showed that these new radii led to a calculated misfit energy in disordered AuCu, which was decreased from the values calculated by the usual theory more than twenty-fold, to only 80 cal per g atom. Thermodynamic calculations from the phase diagram5 also show misfit energy to be no more than a few hundred calories per g atom in this alloy. The question of what electronic rearrangements are possible therefore becomes compelling in estimating misfit energy. In the following pages the results of certain calculations on the AuCu tetragonal superlattice are submitted. Conclusions drawn from these should be applicable in large degree to disordered solid solutions. As in all ordered states, bonding distances in the superlattice are individually known, rather than being merely average distances as found from lattice constants of disordered states. Moreover, only the Au-Au and Cu-Cu distances are strained; the elastic constants of these are known in the elementary state. In the usual calculation it is necessary to assume elastic constants for Au-Cu bonds. Misfit energy has thus been calculable without the need of many simplifying assumptions usually made. It is still assumed that equilibrium bond lengths and elastic properties of the bonds are the same in the alloy as in the pure metals. As previously discussed, this is probably not correct. Also assumed is that the bonds are not affected by strain of neighboring bonds. A calculation of Young's modulus from compressibility data shows this to be far from true; extensive electronic rearrangements take place. It would seem that misfit energy cannot be calculated from elasticity data for the elements. The usual methods may, however, give an upper limit which is often much higher than the true value. The question of electronic rearrangement is, of course, a complex one. Pauling's theory gives a simple, approximate treatment of the relation between type of bond and bond distance. This has been applied with some success to the Au-Cu system, as will be shown in a later section. Misfit Energy in Au-Cu Alloys Hume-Rothery and Raynor6 discuss the Au-CU system as a type example of strain energy. The gold atom is 12.8 pct larger in diameter than the copper atom, near the size factor limit beyond which solid solubility is severely restricted. They therefore consider the misfit energy to be large, a conclusion for which they believe they find evidence in the phase diagram. Gold and copper are completely miscible in the solid state, but the alloy has a minimum melting point at an intermediate composition. From this Hume-Rothery and Raynor conclude that the strain energy is nearly large enough to prevent miscibility; the phase diagram tends toward a eutec-tic type. In Ag-Cu, which has almost identical size relationships, solid miscibility is quite limited; whereas in Au-Ag, where atomic sizes are nearly the same, there is complete miscibility without a minimum in the melting point. From their arguments the heat of formation of Au-Cu would be expected to be endothermic or only slightly exothermic, that of Ag-Cu to be endothermic, and that of Au-Ag to be exothermic. Deviations, from Ve-gard's law of additivity of atomic radii support these conclusions, since Au-Cu and Ag-Cu both have pronounced positive deviations, and Au-Ag has a negative deviation. Nevertheless, Au-Cu alloys form exothermically; indeed, considerably more exothermically than Au-Ag, Table I. Hence, strain energy must be much less important in this case than Hume-Rothery and Raynor have supposed.