skip to main content

Title: Diffusion Coefficients and Phase Equilibria of the Cu-Zn Binary System Studied Using Diffusion Couples
The diffusion behavior and phase equilibria in the Cu-Zn binary system were investigated using solid-solid and solid-liquid diffusion couples. Heat treatments at temperatures ranging from 100 to 750 °C were performed and the samples were examined using optical microscopy, energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy, and electron probe microanalysis to identify the phases and to obtain composition profiles. Solubility limits of both solid solution and intermetallic phases were then evaluated, and a forward-simulation analysis (FSA) was applied to extract interdiffusion coefficients. The composition profiles from Hoxha et al. were also re-analyzed using FSA to obtain more reliable diffusion coefficient data without the assumption of constant diffusion coefficients for the intermetallic phases. A comprehensive assessment of the interdiffusion coefficients in three intermetallic phases of the Cu-Zn system was performed based on the results from the current study as well as those in the literature. Activation energies and Arrhenius pre-factors were evaluated for each phase as a function of composition. The fitted equations based on the comprehensive assessment have the capabilities of computing the interdiffusion coefficients of each of the phase at a given composition and temperature. Suggested modifications to the Cu-Zn binary phase diagram were presented based on the new experimental information gathered more » from the present study. A clear explanation is provided for the puzzling low Zn concentrations often observed in the Cu-rich fcc phase of Cu-Zn diffusion couples in comparison with the expected high solubility values based on the equilibrium Cu-Zn phase diagram. « less
; ;
Award ID(s):
Publication Date:
Journal Name:
Journal of Phase Equilibria and Diffusion
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract

    Forming metallurgical phases has a critical impact on the performance of dissimilar materials joints. Here, we shed light on the forming mechanism of equilibrium and non-equilibrium intermetallic compounds (IMCs) in dissimilar aluminum/steel joints with respect to processing history (e.g., the pressure and temperature profiles) and chemical composition, where the knowledge of free energy and atomic diffusion in the Al–Fe system was taken from first-principles phonon calculations and data available in the literature. We found that the metastable and ductile (judged by the presently predicted elastic constants) Al6Fe is a pressure (P) favored IMC observed in processes involving high pressures. The MoSi2-type Al2Fe is brittle and a strongP-favored IMC observed at high pressures. The stable, brittle η-Al5Fe2is the most observed IMC (followed by θ-Al13Fe4) in almost all processes, such as fusion/solid-state welding and additive manufacturing (AM), since η-Al5Fe2is temperature-favored, possessing high thermodynamic driving force of formation and the fastest atomic diffusivity among all Al–Fe IMCs. Notably, the ductile AlFe3, the less ductile AlFe, and most of the other IMCs can be formed during AM, making AM a superior process to achieve desired IMCs in dissimilar materials. In addition, the unknown configurations of Al2Fe and Al5Fe2were also examined by machine learningmore »based datamining together with first-principles verifications and structure predictions. All the IMCs that are notP-favored can be identified using the conventional equilibrium phase diagram and the Scheil-Gulliver non-equilibrium simulations.

    « less
  2. Eighteen successful diffusion couple experiments in 8-component SiO2–TiO2–Al2O3–FeO–MgO–CaO–Na2O–K2O basaltic melts were conducted at 1260°C and 0.5 GPa and at 1500°C and 1.0 GPa. These experiments are combined with previous data at 1350°C and 1.0 GPa (Guo and Zhang, 2018) to study the temperature dependence of multicomponent diffusion in basaltic melts. Effective binary diffusion coefficients of components with monotonic diffusion profiles were extracted and show a strong dependence on their counter-diffusing component even though the average (or interface) compositions are the same. The diffusion matrix at 1260°C was obtained by simultaneously fitting diffusion profiles of all diffusion couple experiments as well as appropriate data from the literature. All features of concentration profiles in both diffusion couples and mineral dissolution are well reproduced by this new diffusion matrix. At 1500°C, only diffusion couple experiments are used to obtain the diffusion matrix. Eigenvectors of the diffusion matrix are used to discuss the diffusion (exchange) mechanism, and eigenvalues characterize the diffusion rate. Diffusion mechanisms at both 1260 and 1500°C are inferred from eigenvectors of diffusion matrices and compared with those at 1350°C reported in Guo and Zhang (2018). There is indication that diffusion eigenvectors in basaltic melts do not depend much on temperature, butmore »complexity is present for some eigenvectors. The two slowest eigenvectors involve the exchange of SiO2 and/or Al2O3 with nonalkalis. The third slowest eigenvector is due to the exchange of divalent oxides with other oxides. The fastest eigenvector is due to the exchange of Na2O with other oxide components. Some eigenvalues differ from each other by less than 1/3, and their eigenvectors are less well defined. We define small difference in eigenvalues as near degeneracy. In strict mathematical degeneracy, eigenvectors are not uniquely defined because any linear combination of two eigenvectors is also an eigenvector. In the case of near degeneracy, more constraints either in terms of higher data quality or more experiments are needed to resolve the eigenvectors. We made a trial effort to generate a set of average eigenvectors, which are assumed to be constant as temperature varies. The corresponding eigenvalues are roughly Arrhenian. Thus, the temperature-dependent diffusion matrix can be roughly predicted. The method is applied to predict experimental diffusion profiles in basaltic melts during olivine and anorthite dissolution at ~1400°C with preliminary success. We further applied our diffusion matrix to investigate multicomponent diffusion during magma mixing in the Bushveld Complex and found such diffusion may result in an increased likelihood of sulfide and Fe-Ti oxide mineralization.« less
  3. Abstract

    The solidification mechanism and segregation behavior of laser-melted Mn35Fe5Co20Ni20Cu20was firstly investigated via in situ synchrotron x-ray diffraction at millisecond temporal resolution. The transient composition evolution of the random solid solution during sequential solidification of dendritic and interdendritic regions complicates the analysis of synchrotron diffraction data via any single conventional tool, such as Rietveld refinement. Therefore, a novel approach combining a hard-sphere approximation model, thermodynamic simulation, thermal expansion measurement and microstructural characterization was developed to assist in a fundamental understanding of the evolution of local composition, lattice parameter, and dendrite volume fraction corresponding to the diffraction data. This methodology yields self-consistent results across different methods. Via this approach, four distinct stages were identified, including: (I) FCC dendrite solidification, (II) solidification of FCC interdendritic region, (III) solid-state interdiffusion and (IV) final cooling with marginal diffusion. It was found out that in Stage I, Cu and Mn were rejected into liquid as Mn35Fe5Co20Ni20Cu20solidified dendritically. During Stage II, the lattice parameter disparity between dendrite and interdendritic region escalated as Cu and Mn continued segregating into the interdendritic region. After complete solidification, during Stage III, the lattice parameter disparity gradually decreases, demonstrating a degree of composition homogenization. The volume fraction of dendrites slightly grewmore »from 58.3 to 65.5%, based on the evolving composition profile across a dendrite/interdendritic interface in diffusion calculations. Postmortem metallography further confirmed that dendrites have a volume fraction of 64.7% ± 5.3% in the final microstructure.

    « less
  4. Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)
    Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEGmore »channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997.« less
  5. Additions of solute that trap vacancies slow down vacancy diffusion and promote point-defect recombination in alloys subjected to irradiation. Such selective alloying can thus help to minimize the detrimental consequences resulting from point defect fluxes. The current work investigates the effect of solute additions on the recombi- nation rate using kinetic Monte Carlo simulations for a model alloy system, which was parametrized to Cu-Ag in the dilute limit, but with an increased solubility limit, ≈0.86 at.% at 300 K. As the solute concentration was increased above 0.1 at.%, solute clustering was observed and led to a strong increase in recombination rate. The beneficial effects of solute clustering on reducing vacancy mobility, and reducing solute drag, were analyzed by calculating relevant transport coefficients using the KineCluE code (Schuler et al., Computational Materials Science (2020) 172,109,191). Moreover, it was observed in the KMC simulations that large recombination rates resulted in a shift of steady-state distributions of solute cluster sizes to smaller clusters compared to equilibrium distributions in the solid solution. This shift is rationalized as resulting from the irreversible character of the interstitial-vacancy recombination reaction. These results suggest a novel irradiation effect on phase stability where a high recombination rate increases themore »solubility limit of a solute at steady state over its equilibrium value.« less