Annihilation and sources in continuum dislocation dynamics (CDD) arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 12 Sep 2017

Transcription

1 Monavari and Zaiser RESEARCH Annihilation and sources in continuum dislocation dynamics (CDD) arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 1 Sep 017 Mehran Monavari * and Michael Zaiser * Correspondence: mehran.monavari@fau.de Department of Materials Simulation, Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Dr.-Mack-str. 77, Fürth, Germany Full list of author information is available at the end of the article Abstract Continuum dislocation dynamics (CDD) aims at representing the evolution of systems of curved and connected dislocation lines in terms of density-like field variables. Here we discuss how the processes of dislocation multiplication and annihilation can be described within such a framework. We show that both processes are associated with changes in the volume density of dislocation loops: dislocation annihilation needs to be envisaged in terms of the merging of dislocation loops, while conversely dislocation multiplication is associated with the nucleation of new loops. Both findings point towards the importance of including the volume density of loops (or curvature density ) as an additional field variable into continuum models of dislocation density evolution. We explicitly show how this density is affected by loop mergers and loop nucleation. The equations which result for the lowest order CDD theory allow us, after spatial averaging and under the assumption of unidirectional deformation, to recover the classical theory of Kocks and Mecking for the early stages of work hardening. In addition to the total dislocation density, the curvature density acts as an additional internal variable which is dependent upon the direction of stress and may, upon changes in strain path, lead to memory effects (Bauschinger effect). Keywords: Continuum dislocation dynamics; Annihilation; Dislocation sources; CDD 1 Introduction Since the discovery of dislocations as carriers of plastic deformation, developing a continuum theory for motion and interaction of dislocations has been a challenging task. Such a theory should address two interrelated problems: how to represent in a continuum setting the motion of dislocations, hence the kinematics of curved and connected lines, and how to capture dislocation interactions. The classical continuum theory of dislocation systems dates back to Kröner (1958) and Nye (1953). This theory describes the dislocation system in terms of a rank- tensor field α defined as the curl of the plastic distortion, α = β pl. In turn, the evolution of the plastic distortion is related to the dislocation density tensor by Orowan s law, t β pl = v α where the dislocation velocity vector v is defined on the dislocation lines. The time evolution of α becomes t α = [v α] (Mura, 1963). This fundamental setting provided by the classical continuum theory of dislocation systems has, over the past two decades, inspired many models (e.g. Sedláček et al., 003; Xiang, 009; Zhu and Xiang, 015). Irrespective of the specific formulation, a main problem of the classical continuum theory of dislocations is that, in each elenentary volume, the dislocation tensor can measure only the minimum amount of dislocations which are necessary for geometrical compatibility of

2 Monavari and Zaiser Page of 31 plastic distortion ( geometrically necessary dislocations). In the presence of excess dislocations which do not accommodate a strain gradient, using the Orowan law does not lead to a closed formulation of the kinematics since the averaging operator does not commute with the multiplication operation: t β pl v α if we envisage v as the normalized vector sum of all dislocation velocities in an elementary volume. Dislocations of opposite orientation (i.e., opposite tangent vector) contained in the same elementary volume move under a given local stress in opposite directions; upon averaging both their contributions to v and to α mutually cancel, whereas their contribution to the product β pl does not. Hence a theory which considers only averaged values of v and α is necessarily incomplete unless its spatial resolution is such that only dislocations of the same orientation and velocity (in practice this means: a single dislocation or none) are contained in each volume element: Completeness of the classical theory requires that we are dealing with single-valued dislocation density (SVDD) fields. Numerical implementations of the classical theory which fulfill this requirement by using a very high spatial resolution have in recent years produced very encouraging results. We mention, in particular, the recent formulation by El-Azab which incorporates statistical phenomena such as cross-slip (Xia and El-Azab, 015) and time averaging (Xia et al., 016) and has shown promising results in modelling dislocation pattern formation. This formulation is based upon a decomposition of the tensor α into contributions of dislocations from the different slip systems β in the form α = β bβ ρ β where b β is the Burgers vector of dislocations on slip system β and the dislocation density vector ρ β of these dislocations points in their local line direction. Accordingly, the evolution of the dislocation density tensor is written as t α = β bβ t ρ β with t ρ β = [v β ρ β ] where the dislocation velocities v β are again slip system specific. We consider a decomposition of the dislocation density tensor into slip system specific tensors as indispensable for connecting continuum crystal plasticity to dislocation physics, since it is otherwise impossible to relate the dislocation velocity v in a meaningful manner to the physical processes controlling dislocation glide and climb the glide and climb directions evidently depend on the respective slip system. We use a description of the dislocation system by slip system specific dislocation density vectors as the starting point of our subsequent discussion. SVDD theories which are formulated in terms of slip system specific dislocation density vectors are kinematically exact and can be physically connected to the micro-mechanisms of dislocation motion. One may of course ask what is the benefit of formulating a density based theory with a spatial resolution that is well below the spacing of the discrete objects which is needed to fulfill the SVDD requirement. For describing a given dislocation system, such a theory may need more rather than less degrees of freedom compared to a discrete dislocation dynamics model. There are nevertheless good reasons to adopt SVDD formulations: Density based formulations allow us to use spatio-temporally smoothed velocity fields which reduce the intermittency of dislocation motion in discrete simulations. Even more than long-range interactions and complex kinematics, the extreme intermittency of dislocation motion and the resulting numerical stiffness of the simulations is a main factor that makes discrete dislocation dynamics simulations computationally very expensive. We shall discuss this point in detail elsewhere.

3 Monavari and Zaiser Page 3 of 31 While we accept SVDD as a viable starting point it is obvious that, in order to pass from the micro- to the macroscale, averaging operations are needed which necessarily conflict with the SVDD paradigm. Hence, we need to ask how we can average the classical theory in cases where dislocations of multiple orientations and slip systems are contained in the same elementary volume. One solution to this problem consists in describing the dislocation microstructure by multiple dislocation density fields which each represent a specific dislocation orientation θ on a slip system β. Accordingly, all dislocations of such a partial population move in the same direction in such a way that t ρ β θ [ vβ θ ρβ θ ]. Groma, Zaiser and coworkers (Groma, 1997; Groma et al., 003; Zaiser et al., 001) developed statistical approaches for evolution of D systems of straight, positive and negative edge dislocations. Inspired by such D models, Arsenlis et al. (004); Leung et al. (015); Reuber et al. (014) developed 3D models by considering additional orientations. However, extending the D approach to 3D systems where connected and curved dislocation lines can move perpendicular to their line direction while remaining topologically connected is not straightforward, and most models use simplified kinematic rules for coupling the motion of dislocations of different orientations that cannot in general guarantee dislocation connectivity (see Monavari et al. (016) for a detailed discussion). A mathematically rigorous approach towards density-based representation of generic 3D systems of curved dislocation lines is based on the idea of Kosevich (1979) of envisaging dislocations in a phase space where densities carry additional information about their line orientation in terms of continuous orientation variables hence, θ becomes a continuous variable. Hochrainer and co-workers showed that the definition of the dislocation density tensor in a higher dimensional phase space leads, in a mathematically necessary manner, to additional tensor components containing the dislocation curvature k as an additional field variable (Hochrainer, 006; Hochrainer et al., 007; Sandfeld et al., 010). The resulting higher dimensional continuum dislocation dynamics (hdcdd) theory has been shown to provide a kinematically consistent, density based formulation for dislocation microstructure evolution. Implementing the dislocation dynamics in a higher-dimensional setting, where in addition to the 3D Euclidean space the orientation space needs to be discretized in each spatial point, incurs however a very high computational cost. This was overcome by developing the simplified continuum dislocation dynamics (CDD) models where the evolution of the higher dimensional dislocation density tensor is formulated in terms of its alignment tensor expansion series (Hochrainer, 015). The components of the dislocation density alignment tensors can be envisaged as density-like fields which contain more and more detailed information about the orientation distribution of dislocations. CDD has been used to simulate various phenomena including dislocation patterning (Sandfeld and Zaiser, 015; Wu et al., 017b) and co-evolution of phase and dislocation microstructure (Wu and Sandfeld, 016; Wu et al., 017a). The formulation in terms of alignment tensors has proven particularly versatile since one can formulate the elastic energy functional of the dislocation system in terms of dislocation density alignment tensors (Zaiser, 015) and then use this functional to derive the dislocation velocity in a thermodynamically consistent manner (Hochrainer, 016). Both hdcdd and alignment tensor based CDD at present suffer from an important limitation. In these theories, the total dislocation density changes due to

4 Monavari and Zaiser Page 4 of 31 elongation or shrinkage of dislocation loops, however, the number of loops is a conserved quantity. This leads to unrealistic dislocation starvation and hardening behavior for a bulk crystal (Monavari et al., 014). The goal of the present paper is to incorporate into the CDD theorzy mechanisms which change the number of dislocation loops by accounting for the merger of loops consequent to local annihilation of dislocation segments from different loops and for the formation of loops by operation of sources. First we revisit the hierarchical evolution equations of CDD. Then we introduce a kinematic model to describe the annihilation of dislocations in higher dimensional phase space. We calculate the annihilation rate for the variables of the lowest-order CDD theories. Then we introduce models for incorporating activation of Frank-Read sources, cross slip sources and glissile junctions into CDD. We demonstrate that by incorporating of annihilation (loop merger) and sources (loop nucleatinon) into CDD, even a lowest-order CDD formulation can predict the first 3 stages of work hardening. Continuum Dislocation Dynamics.1 Conventions and notations We describe the kinematics of the deforming body by a displacement vector field u. Considering linearized kinematics of small deformations we use an additive decomposition of the corresponding deformation gradient into elastic and plastic parts: u = β el + β pl. Dislocationsn of Burgers vectors b β are assumed to move only by glide (unless stated otherwise) and are therefore confined to their slip planes with slip plane normal vectors n β. This motion generates a plastic shear γ β in slip direction s β = b β /b where b is the modulus of b β. We use the following sign convention: A dislocation loop which expands under positive resolved shear stress is called a positive loop, the corresponding dislocation density vector ρ β points in counterclockwise direction with respect to the slip plane normal n β. Summing the plastic shear tensors of all slip systems gives the plastic distortion: β pl = β γβ n β s β. On the slip system level, without loss of generality, we use a Cartesian coordinate system with unit vectors e β 1 = sβ, e β 3 = nβ and e β = aβ = n β s β. A slip system specific Levi-Civita tensor ε β with coordinates ε β ij is constructed by contracting the fully antisymmetric Levi-Civita operator with the slip plane normal, ε β ij = ε ijkn β k. The operation t.ε β =: t β then rotates a vector t on the slip plane coounter-clockwise by 90 around n β. In the following we drop, for brevity, the superscript β as long as definitions and calculations pertaining to a single slip system are concerned. As discussed above, the quantity which is fundamental to density based models that operate on the SVDD level is the slip system specific dislocation density vector ρ. The modulus of this vector defines a scalar density ρ = ρ and the unit vector l = ρ/ρ gives the local dislocation direction. The m th order power tensor of l is defined by the recursion relation l 1 = l, l m+1 = l m l. In the slip system coordinate system, l can be expressed in terms of the orientation angle ϕ between the line tangent and the slip direction as l(ϕ β ) = cos(ϕ)e 1 +sin(ϕ)e. When moving beyond the SVDD scale, we need to consider volume elements containing dislocations of many orientations: in this case the local statistics of dislocation orientations is expressed in terms of the probability density function p r (ϕ) of the orientation angle ϕ within a volume element located at r. We denote p r (ϕ) as the local dislocation

5 Monavari and Zaiser Page 5 of 31 orientation distribution function (DODF). The DODF is completely determined by the set of moments ϕ n r but also by the expectation values of the power tensor series l n r. The latter quantities turn out to be particularly useful for setting up a kinematic theory. Specifically, the so-called dislocation density alignment tensors ρ (n) (r) := ρ l n r = ρ p r (ϕ)l(ϕ) n dϕ. (1) turn out to be suitable field variables for constructing a statistically averaged theory of dislocation kinematics above the SVDD level. Components of k-th order alignment tensor ρ (k) (r) are expressed as ρ a1...a k. ρ (n) (r) = ρ (n) (r)/ρ denotes normalization of an alignment tensors by dividing it by total dislocation density. T r( ) gives the trace of a symmetric alignment tensor by summation over any two indices. Symmetric part of tensor is denoted by [ ] sym. Time derivative of the quantity x is denoted by t (x) or ẋ interchangeably.. Kinematic equations of an averaged theory To construct averaged kinematic equations we start out from the slip system specific Mura equation in the form t ρ = [v ρ] () If deformation on the slip system is a pure shear, then the velocity vector must have the direction e v = l n = ρ n/ρ which defines the local direction of dislocation glide. In other words, the direction e v (but not the magnitude v) of the local velocity vector v = ve v is completely determined by the local ρ. By contrast, the velocity magnitude v depends (through the internal stress of the dislocation system) on ρ only weakly and in a non-local manner. To account for the functional dependency of the dislocation glide direction on the dislocation density vector we re-write the slip system specific Mura equation prior to averaging in the form t ρ = [v ρ] = [vl n lρ] = n(ρv) = e n. (ρv). (3) In addition we find because of t α = t ρ b = t β pl that the plastic strain rate and the shear strain rate on the considered slip system fulfil the Orowan equation t β pl = [n b]ρv = [n s] t γ, t γ = ρbv. (4) It follows that, in order to obtain a closed description that accounts for the geometrical correlation between glide direction and dislocation orientation, we need to derive an equation for the scalar density ρ. This is straightforwardly done by noting that ρ = ρ.ρ, hence t ρ = (ρ/ρ) t ρ. After a few straightforward algebraic manipulations we obtain t ρ = e n. (ρv) + qv (5)

6 Monavari and Zaiser Page 6 of 31 where we introduced the notation q := ρ(e n. )l. (6) To interpret this new variable we write (e n. )l in a coordinate system spanned by the vectors n, l, e v to find that (e n. )l = (l. )(l.e v ) = k is the dislocation curvature, i.e. the reciprocal radius of curvature of the dislocation line. Hence the product q = ρk can be called a curvature density. Integration of q over a large volume V yields the number of loops contained in V, hence, q may also be envisaged as a loop density. The quantity q defines a new independent variable. Its evolution equation is straightforwardly obtained from those of ρ and l = ρ/ρ. After some algebra we obtain t q = (vq ρ () v). (7) In this equation, the right-hand side contains the second order tensor (dislocation density tensor) ρ () = ρl l = ρ ρ/ρ. By using the fact that ρ is divergencefree,.ρ =.(ρl) = 0, we can show that the vector q = qe n.l derives from this dislocation density tensor according to q = [.ρ () ] sym. We thus find that the equation for the curvature density q contains a rank- dislocation density tensor which can be envisaged as the normalized power tensor of the dislocation density vector. On the next higher level, we realize that the equation for ρ () contains higher-order curvature tensors which derive from dislocation density tensors of higher order, leading to an infinite hierarchy of equations given in full by t ρ = ε (vρ) + vq (8) t q = (vq ρ () v) (9) [ ] t ρ (n) = ε (vρ (n 1) ) + (n 1)vQ (n) (n 1)ε ρ (n+1) v (10) where the higher order curvature tensors Q (n) = q(e n.l) (e n.l) l (n ). derive from the dislocation density tensors according to q (n) (r) = 1 n [ ] divρ (n+1) (r). (11) sym sym where q (n) = q(e n.l) l (n 1). Only the curvature density q (0) =: q cannot be expressed by this relation. Of course, one may ask what is the benefit of replacing the single Mura equation by an equivalent infinite hierarchy. Indeed, for SVDD this replacement is pointless. Its benefits become however apparent if one proceeds to averages over volumes containing dislocations of many orientations. In that case, while it is blatantly wrong to assume that all dislocations move with the same average velocity vector (hence in the same direction), it may be much more meaningful to assume that they move with the same average speed but in different directions: While we simply

7 Monavari and Zaiser Page 7 of 31 cannot replace v by an average v in any meaningful manner, we can do so with the scalar speed v. This observation is at the core of our averaging strategy. It remains to close the infinite hierarchy of evolution equations of the alignment tensors, where higher order tensors always appear in the evolution equations of lower-order tensors. A theory that uses alignment tensors of order k can be completely specified by the evolution equation of q together with the equations for the ρ (k 1) and ρ (k) tensors (lower order tensors can be obtained from these by contraction). However, in order to obtain a closed theory the tensor ρ (k+1) needs to be approximated in terms of lower order tensors in order to close the system of equations. A systematic approach for deriving such closure approximations was proposed by Monavari (Monavari et al., 016). The fundamental idea is to use the Maximum Information Entropy Principle (MIEP) in order to estimate the DODF based upon the information contained in alignment tensors up to order k, and then use the estimated DODF to evaluate, from Eq. (1), the missing alignment tensor ρ (k+1). By using the method of Lagrange multipliers, we can construct a DODF which has maximum information entropy and is consistent with the known alignment tensors. The CDD theory constructed by using this DODF to estimate ρ (k+1) and thus obtain a closed set of equations is called the k-th order CDD theory (CDD (k) ). In particular, if the reconstructed DODF is symmetric around GND direction ϕ ρ it takes the form: ρ(ϕ) = ρ exp [ ] k λ i cos i (ϕ ϕ ρ ) i=0 where the Lagrangian multipliers λ i can be expressed as functions of dislocation moments M (k) which we define as the first components of the alignment tensors in the rotated coordinates: M (k) := ρ (k) (ϕ ϕ ρ). Closing the theory at zeroth order is tantamount to assuming a uniform DODF for which the corresponding closure relation reads ρ (1) 0. In this case, the evolution equations are simply (1) t ρ = vq (13) t q = 0 (14) These equations represent the expansion of a system consisting of a constant number of loops.closing the evolution equation at ρ (1) and ρ () gives the the first order CDD (1) and second order CDD () theories respectively. In Appendix C and Appendix D, we discuss their formulation in detail. 3 Dynamic dislocation annihilation If dislocation segments of opposite orientation which belong to different dislocation loops closely approach each other, they may annihilate. This process leads to a merger of the two loops. The mechanism that determines the reaction distance is different for dislocations of near-screw and near-edge orientations: 1 Two near-screw dislocations of opposite sign, gliding on two parallel planes, annihilate by cross slip of one of them.

8 Monavari and Zaiser Page 8 of 31 Two near-edge dislocations annihilate by spontaneous formation and disintegration of very narrow unstable dislocation dipole when the attractive elastic force between two dislocations exceeds the force required for dislocation climb. As opposed to screw annihilation this process generates interstitial or vacancy type point defects. This difference results in different annihilation distances for screw and edge segments. The dependency of the maximum annihilation distance y a between line segments on applied stress and dislocation line orientation ϕ is well known (Kusov and Vladimirov, 1986; Pauš et al., 013). For instance, Essmann and Mughrabi (1979) observed that at low temperatures (smaller than 0% of the melting temperature), the annihilation distance changes from around 1.5nm for pure edge dislocations to around 50nm for pure screws in copper. 3.1 Dislocation annihilation in theories based on the Kröner-Nye tensor In a SVDD system, dislocations of different orientation can by definition not coexist in the averaging volume. Using the Mura equation for such a system implies that the size of the averaging volume is directly acting as the annihilation distance for all dislocations. Hence, it is difficult to account for differences in the annihilation behavior of edge and screw dislocations. Recently Xia and El-Azab (015) addressed this problem by assuming in addition a stochastically activated cross slip process. However this solution leads to another problem: statistical cross slips spread the dislocation density across several slip planes. This may lead to situations where the dislocation density is smaller than the density of a single dislocation line. In this case the probability of mutual annihilation of dislocations is over-estimated. 3. Dislocation annihilation in continuum dislocation dynamics 3..1 Straight parallel dislocations Coarse-grained continuum theories that allow for the coexistence of dislocations of different orientations within the same volume element require a different approach to annihilation. Traditionally this approach has used analogies with kinetic theory where two particles react if they meet within a reaction distance y a. Models such as the one proposed by Arsenlis et al. (004) formulate a similar approach for dislocations by focusing on encounters of straight lines which annihilate once they meet within a reaction cross-section (annihilation distance) leading to bi-molecular annihilation terms (Fig. 1(left)). However, dislocations are not particles, and in our opinion the problem is better formulated in terms of the addition of dislocation density vectors within an reaction volume that evolves as dislocations sweep along their glide planes. For didactic reasons we first consider the well-understood case of annihilation of straight parallel dislocations in these terms (Fig. 1(left)). We consider positive dislocations of density vector ρ + = e a ρ + and negative dislocations of density vector ρ = e a ρ. During each time step dt, each positive dislocation may undergo reactions with negative dislocations contained within a differential annihilation volume V a = 4y a vwdt where w is the system extension in the dislocation line direction and the factor 4 stems from the fact that the annihilation cross section is Y a, and the relative velocity v. The total annihilation volume in a reference volume V associated with positive dislocations is obtained by multiplying this

9 Monavari and Zaiser Page 9 of 31 volume with the dislocation number N +. The positive dislocation density in V is ρ + = N ± w/ V, hence, the differential annihilation volume fraction (differential annihilation volume divided by reference volume) for positive dislocations is f + a = V a N + V = y avρ + (15) Annihilation is now simply tantamount to replacing, within the differential annihilation volume, the instantaneous values of ρ + and ρ by their vector sum. This summation reduces the densities of both positive and negative dislocations by ρ. The average density changes in the reference volume V are obtained by multiplying with the respective volume fractions, hence dρ + dt = dρ dt = (f + ρ + f ρ + ) = 4y a vρ + ρ. (16) Note that this result is symmetrical with respect to positive and negative dislocations, hence, it could also have been obtained by considering the annihilation volume around negative dislocations instead (one might also consider both, however, in this case one needs to divide by a factor of in order to not count annihilation events twice). 3.. Recombination of non-parallel dislocations Our argument based on the differential annihilation volume can be straightforwardly generalized to families of non-parallel dislocations. We first consider the case where the annihilation distance does not depend on segment orientation. We consider two families of dislocations of directions l and l with densities ρ l and ρ l (Fig. 1(right)) moving at velocity v perpendicular to their line direction. The argument then runs in strict analogy to the previous consideration, however, since the product of the reaction is not zero we speak of a recombination rather than an annihilation reaction. Furthermore, the differential reaction (recombination) volume is governed not by the absolute velocity of the dislocations but by the velocity v a at which either of the families sweeps over the other. This velocity is obtained by considering the relative velocity v rel = v cos α ll where α ll = π ψ and ψ is the angle between the velocity vectors of both families (Fig. 1(right)). The recombination area that each segment sweeps by its relative motion to the other segment is given by A a = v cos α ll wdt. The differential recombination volume is then in analogy to Eq. 15 given by f l r = 4y a v cos (α ll )ρ l. (17) Within this volume fraction we identify for each segment of direction l a segment of orientation l of equal length and replace the two segments by their vector sum (in the previously considered case of opposite segment directions, this sum is zero). Hence, we reduce, within the differential recombination volume, both densities by equal amounts ρ l and add new segments of orientation l and density ρ l s where l and s fulfil the relations: s = l + l, s = s, l = s s (18) (19)

10 Monavari and Zaiser Page 10 of 31 Figure 1 Left: Differential annihilation volume of opposite edge dislocations is determined by multiplying their relative velocity v rel = v w.r.t. each other with the line segment length w and the annihilation window y cb and time step δt: V a = 4vy annwdt. Right: Similarly, differential recombination volume of segments with orientation ϕ and ϕ = π + ϕ α ll is determined by multiplying their relative velocity v rel = v cos(α ll ) w.r.t. the each other with the projected line segment w cos(α ll ) which is perpendicular to relative velocity and the annihilation window y cb and time step δt: V a = 4vy ann cos (α ll )wdt. Figure Dislocation loops in a cross slip configuration. After cross slip annihilation two semi-loops are connected by collinear jogs moving in Burgers vector direction. We can now write out the rates of dislocation density change due to recombination as dρ l dt dρ l dt = dρ l dt = 4y a vρ l ρ l cos (α ll ), = 4y a vρ l ρ l cos (α ll )s (l, Bl ). (0) For dislocations of opposite line directions, α ll = 0 and s = 0, hence, we recover the previous expression for annihilation of parallel straight dislocations. For dislocations of the same line direction, α ll = π/, s =, and l = l = l, hence, there is no change in the dislocation densities Recombination of loops triggered by cross slip We now generalize our considerations to general non-straight dislocations, i.e., to ensembles of loops. We first observe that the relations for straight non-parallel dislocations hold locally also for curved dislocations, provided that the dislocation lines do not have sharp corners. For curved dislocations we characterize the dislocation

11 Monavari and Zaiser Page 11 of 31 Figure 3 Top view of a cross slip induced recombination process. Left: cross slip initiates the annihilation of near-screw segments of two merging dislocation loops. The dashed lines shows the annihilated parts of the loops. After the initiation of the cross slip, loops continue to merge by interaction between segments AB(s(ϕ)) and AC (s(ϕ )). Right: Recombination of segments s(ϕ) and s(ϕ ) generates a new segment s(ϕ ) with edge orientation which changes the total dislocation density and mean orientation. ensemble in terms of its DODF of orientation angles, i.e., we write l = l(ϕ) = (cos ϕ, sin ϕ), ρ l = ρp(ϕ); l = l(ϕ ) = (cos ϕ, sin ϕ ),, ρ l = ρp(ϕ ); l = l(ϕ ) = (cos ϕ, sin ϕ ),, ρ l = ρp(ϕ ); α ll = α(ϕ, ϕ ). (1) We now first consider the recombination of loops initiated by cross slip of screw dislocation segments. This process is of particular importance because the annihilation distance y cs for near-screw dislocations is almost two orders of magnitude larger than for other orientations (Pauš et al., 013). The recombination process is initiated if two near-screw segments which are oriented within a small angle ϕ a [ ϕ, ϕ] from the screw orientations ϕ = 0 and ϕ = π pass within the distance y cs (Fig. ). Mutual interactions then cause one of the near-screw segments to cross slip and move on the cross-slip plane until it annihilates with the other segment. However, it would be erroneous to think that cross slip only affects the balance of near-screw oriented segments: Cross slip annihilation of screw segments connects two loops by a pair of segments which continue to move in the cross-slip plane. We can visualize the geometry of this process by considering the projection of the resulting configuration on the primary slip plane. Fig. 3(left) depicts the top view of a situation some time after near-screw segments of two loops moving on parallel slip planes have merged by cross slip. As the loops merge, the intersection point A which corresponds to a collinear jog in the cross slip plane that connects segments of direction l(ϕ) and l(ϕ ) in the primary slip planes moves in the Burgers vector direction. Hence, the initial cross slip triggers an ongoing recombination of segments of both loops as the loops continue to expand in the primary slip system (Devincre et al., 007). Comparing with Figure 1 we see that in this case, the two segments fulfill the orientation relationship ϕ = π ϕ and that the angle α ll and the length of the

12 Monavari and Zaiser Page 1 of 31 recombined segment are given by α ll = ϕ, () ϕ = π sign(π ϕ), (3) s = l + l = sin ϕ. (4) We now make an important conceptual step by observing that, if two segments pertaining to different loops in the configuration shown in Figure 1 are found at distance less than y cs, then a screw annihilation event must have taken place in the past. Hence, we can infer from the current configuration that in this case the loops are recombining. The rates for the process follow from (0) as dρ(ϕ) = dρ(ϕ ) = 4y cs vρ p(ϕ)p(ϕ ) cos (ϕ), dt dt dρ(ϕ ) = 8y cs vρ p(ϕ)p(ϕ ) cos (ϕ) sin ϕ. (5) dt Multiplying (31) with the appropriate power tensors of the line orientation vectors and integrating over the orientation window where cross slip is possible gives the change of alignment tensors due to cross slip induced recombination processes: t ρ (k) cs = 4y cs vρ 4y cs vρ [ ] Θ( ϕ ϕ + ϕ π ) cos (ϕ) l (k) (ϕ) sin(ϕ) l (k) (π/) dϕ dϕ [ ] Θ( ϕ ϕ + ϕ 3π ) cos (ϕ) l (k) (ϕ) sin(ϕ) l (k) (3π/) dϕ dϕ. (6) Here Θ is Heaviside s unit step function that equals 1 if its argument is positive or zero, and zero otherwise. Hence, ϕ must be located within ϕ from π ϕ if ϕ is less than π, and within ϕ from 3π ϕ if ϕ is bigger than π Isotropic recombination of general dislocations by climb Next we consider recombination by climb which we suppose to be possible for dislocations of any orientation that are within a direction-independent cross-section y cb of others. Hence, the process is - unlike cross slip - isotropic in the sense that an initially isotropic orientation distribution will remain so, and recombination can occur between segments of any orientation provided they find themselves within a distance of less than y cb. To analyze this process, we focus on the plane of symmetry that bisects the angle between both segments. This plane is at an angle θ from the screw dislocation orientation, see Fig. 4. Now, if we rotate the picture by θ, it is clear that the geometry of the process is exactly the same as in case of cross slip induced multiplication, and that only the appropriate substitutions need to be

13 Monavari and Zaiser Page 13 of 31 b A B B C A C Figure 4 Left: Two dislocation loops are merging by climb annihilation initiated at segments with angles θ and π + θ. Right: Interaction between segments s(ϕ) and s(ϕ = π + θ ϕ) generates a news segment s(ϕ ) with orientation perpendicular to θ. made. The following geometrical relations hold: θ(ϕ, ϕ ) = ϕ + ϕ π, (7) α(ϕ, ϕ ) = ϕ ϕ + π, (8) ϕ = ϕ + ϕ, (9) ( ) s = ϕ ϕ cos. (30) According to (0) the rate of recombination between segments of directions ϕ and ϕ then leads to the following density changes: ( ) dρ(ϕ) = dρ(ϕ ) ϕ ϕ = 4y a vρ p(ϕ)p(ϕ ) sin, dt dt dρ(ϕ ( ) ( ) ) ϕ ϕ = 8y a vρ p(ϕ)p(ϕ ) sin ϕ ϕ cos. (31) dt Multiplying (31) with the appropriate power tensors of the line orientation vectors and integrating over all orientations gives the change of alignment tensors due to climb recombination processes: t ρ (k) = 4y cb vρ ( ) [ ( ) ( )] ϕ ϕ p(ϕ)p(ϕ ) sin l (k) (ϕ) ϕ ϕ ϕ + ϕ cos l (k) dϕ dϕ (3) In particular, the rates of change of the lowest-order tensors are t ρ = 4y cb vρ ( ) [ ( ) ] ϕ ϕ p(ϕ)p(ϕ ) sin 1 ϕ ϕ cos dϕ dϕ (33) t ρ = 0. (34)

14 Monavari and Zaiser Page 14 of 31 Figure 5 Activation of a Frank-Read source: A dislocation segment (black) pinned at both ends bows out under applied stress and creates a metastable half-loop. If the shear stress acting on the source is higher than a critical value, this semi-loop expands further and rotates around the pinned ends. The recombination of loop segments (red) then generates a new complete loop (blue) and restores the original configuration. The latter identity is immediately evident if one remembers that ρ is the vector sum of all dislocation density vectors in a volume, hence, it cannot change if any two of these are added up and replaced with their sum vector. 4 Dynamic dislocation sources During early stages of plastic deformation of a well-annealed crystal (ρ 10 6 ), the dislocation density can increase by several orders of magnitude. This increase of dislocation density contributes to many different phenomena such as work hardening. Therefore, no dislocation theory is complete without adequate consideration of the multiplication problem. In CDD, multiplication in the sense of line length increase by loop expansion occurs automatically because the kinematics of curved lines requires so, however, the generation of new loops is not accounted for. In this section, we discuss several dynamic mechanisms that increase the loop density by generating new dislocation loops. First we introduce the well-known Frank-Read source and its the formulation in the CDD framework. Then double-cross-slip processes are considered. Finally we discuss glissile junctions which also play an important role in work hardening. Our focus is on the kinematic aspects of these mechanisms and the necessary steps towards incorporating them into the CDD theory. We will not address other mechanisms such as dislocation nucleation under tremendous local shear stress or through diffusion processes which occur on relatively long time scales (Li, 015; Messerschmidt and Bartsch, 003). 4.1 Frank-Read sources The main mechanism for generation of new dislocation loops in low stress conditions was first suggested by Frank and Read (1950). A Frank-Read source is a dislocation segment with pinned end points, e.g. by interactions with other defects or by changing to a slip plane where it is not mobile. Under stresses higher than a critical stress, the segment bows out and generates a new dislocation loop and a pinned segment identical to the initial segment. Therefore, a Frank-Read source

15 Monavari and Zaiser Page 15 of 31 can successively generate closed dislocation loops Fig. 5. A Frank-Read source can only emit dislocations when the shear stress is higher than a critical stress needed to overcome the maximum line tension force (Hirth and Lothe, 198): σ cr Gb r FR, (35) where the radius of the metastable loop is half the source length, r FR = L. The activation rate of Frank-Read sources has been subject of several studies. Steif and Clifton (1979) found that in typical FCC metals, the multiplication process is controlled by the activation rate at the source, where the net driving force is minimum due to high line tension. The nucleation time can be expressed in a universal plot of dimensionless stress σ = σl/gb vs dimensionless time t = t nuc σb/bl, where t nuc is the nucleation time and B is the dislocation viscous drag coefficient. For a typical σ 4, the reduced time becomes t 10 (Hirth and Lothe, 198). However, this exercise may be somewhat pointless because the stress at the source cannot be controlled from outside, rather, it is strongly influenced by local dislocation-dislocation correlations, such as the back stress from previously emitted loops. Such correlations have, in effect, a self-regulating effect: If the velocity of dislocation motion near the source for some reason exceeds the velocity far away from the source, then the source will emit dislocations rapidly which pile up close to it and exert a back stress that shuts down the source. Conversely, if the velocity at the source is reduced, then previously emitted dislocations are convected away and the back stress decreases, such that source operation accelerates. The bottomline is, the source will in some way or another synchronize its activation rate with the motions of dislocations at a distance. In our kinematic framework which averages over volumes containing many dislocations, it is thus reasonable to express the activation time in terms of the average dislocation velocity v = σb/b as: τ = ηr FR /v. (36) (36) implies that the activation rate is equal to the time that an average dislocation takes to travel η times the Frank-Read source radius before a closed loop is formed. In DDD simulations, a common practice for creating the initial dislocation structure is to consider a fixed number of grown-in Frank-Read sources distributed over the different slip systems (Motz et al., 009). Assuming that the length of these sources is r FR and the density of the source dislocations is ρ FR, then their volume density is n FR = ρ FR /(r FR ). The activation frequency is given by the inverse of the nucleation time: ν FR = v/(ηr FR ). (37) In CDD, the Kröner-Nye tensor and the GND vector ρ are solenoidal or divergence free, because they represent a density of closed curves. In order to preserve the solenoidality of the microstructure, the contribution of sources will only be accounted after emission of a full closed loop. An activated Frank-Read source emits

16 Monavari and Zaiser Page 16 of 31 a dislocation loop and isotropically increases the dislocation line length by πηr FR and the line length times curvature by π: ρ fr = πηr FR n FR ν FR = πv ρ fr r FR, (38) q fr = πn FR ν FR = πv ρ FR ηrfr. (39) ρ fr (ϕ) = ρ fr /(π), (40) q fr (ϕ) = q fr /(π). (41) The generation rates of the symmetric alignment tensors become: ρ (1) fr = ρ () fr = ρ fr (ϕ)ldϕ = 0, (4) ρ fr (ϕ)l () dϕ = 1 I() ρ fr. (43) (4) indicates that the activation of Frank-Read sources does not change the amount of GND. Furthermore, we need to account for the strain associated with the formation of loops of size ηr FR which is given by γ fr = πηr FRbn FR ν FR = πηv ρ FR. (44) Source activity has two consequences: First, new line length is generated in form of the newly nucleated loops. We will later show in quantitative terms that this effect is, except in the very first stage of deformation, negligible as compared to the line length increase due to expansion of already existing loops. A second effect is that the newly created loops have high curvature of the order of the inverse loop radius, hence they are more efficient in creating line length than old loops that have been expanding for a long time. This effect of increasing the average curvature of the dislocation microstructure in the long term has a bigger effect on the evolution of the microstructure than the immediate increase of ρ. In low density situations where immobile crystal defects are readily available for trapping the gliding dislocation segments, the density of Frank-Read sources can be assumed as a fraction of total dislocation density. 4. Double-cross-slip sources Koehler (195) suggested the double-cross-slip mechanism as a similar mechanism to a Frank-Read source that can also repeatedly emit dislocation loops. In doublecross-slip, a screw segment that is gliding on the plane with maximum resolved shear stress (MRSS) and is blocked by an obstacle cross-slips to a slip plane with lower MRSS. After passing the obstacle it cross slips back to the original slip system and produces two super jogs connecting the dislocation lines. These two super-jogs may act as pinning points for the dislocation and in practice produce Frank-Read like sources. The double-cross-slip source is the result of the interaction of dislocations on different slip planes and therefore a dynamic process. Several DDD studies such as Hussein et al. (015) have tried to link the number of double-cross-slip sources in the bulk and on the boundary of grains to the total

17 Monavari and Zaiser Page 17 of 31 Figure 6 A doubly cross-slipped segment may act as a Frank-Read source on a parallel slip plane. dislocation density. They observed that the number of double-cross-slip sources increases with dislocation density and specimen size. However, these studies fall short of identifying an exact relation between the activation rate of cross-slip-sources and system parameters. In the following we introduce a model for incorporating this process into CDD. The density of screw dislocations ρ β s on the slip system β is: ρ β s = ϕ ϕ ρ β (ϕ) + π+ ϕ π ϕ ρ β (ϕ), (45) which in general is a function of dislocation moments functions. For the case of isotropic DODF this can be simplified to ρ β s = 4 ϕρ β (ϕ = 0) + ρ β (ϕ = π) = 4 ϕ 1 π ρβ. We assume that due to the interaction of screw dislocation on this slip system with dislocation on slip system β, a fraction f dcs of the screw density is in the form of double-cross-slipped and pinned segments. Hence, the source density is n dcs = ρ s /r dcs, where the pinning length of the cross slipped segments r dcs is of the order of the spacing of dislocations on the slip plane β which are acting as obstacles: r dcs = 1/ ρ β. We assume for the double-cross-slip source exactly the same relations as for the grown-in sources of density ρ FR and radius r FR. Thus, the generation rates of dislocation density and curvature density become: ρ β dcs β q β dcs β πf ββ dcs vβ ρ β s ρ β, (46) π f ββ dcs η vβ ρ β s ρ β, (47) ρ (1)β dcs = 0, (48) ρ ()β dcs = 1 I() ρ β dcs. (49) The strain associated with loop generation is γ β dcs = β πηbf ββ dcs vβ ρβ s (50) Activation of the double-cross-slip source has a autocatalytic effect on increasing the dislocation density. The only missing parameters in this formulation are the non-dimensional numbers f dcs and β which should be determined by fitting CDD

18 Monavari and Zaiser Page 18 of 31 Figure 7 Glissile junction reproduced from Stricker and Weygand (015): Two dislocations on slip systems (b 1, n 1 ) and (b, n ) interact and form a glissile junction acting like a Frank-Read source on slip system (b 3, n ). data to an ensemble average of DDD simulations. While in bulk systems these parameters only depend on the crystal structure and possibly on the distribution of dislocations over the slip systems, for small systems, f cs and β are expected to be functions of ρl s, the system size (e.g. grain size) l s in terms of dislocations spacing, because the source process may be modified e.g. by image interactions at the surface. 4.3 Glissile junctions When two dislocations gliding on different slip systems (β, β ) intersect, it can be energetically favorable for them to react and form a third segment called junction. Depending on the Burgers vectors and slip planes of the interacting segments this junction can be glissile (mobile) or sessile (immobile). Fig. 7 depicts the formation of a glissile junction. The segment (a) on the slip system (b 1, n 1 ) interacts with the segment (b) on the slip system (b, n ) and together they produce the junction (c) on the slip system (b 3 = b 1 + b, n ) which lies on the same glide plane as the segment (b). This mechanism produces a Frank-Read source on the slip system (b 3, n ) with endpoints that can move and adjust the critical stress to the applied shear stress. Recently Stricker and Weygand (015) studied the role of glissile junctions in plastic deformation. They found by considering different dislocation densities, sizes and crystal orientations of samples, that glissile junctions are one of the major contributors to the total dislocation density and plastic deformation. The activation rate of the glissile junctions can be formulated in a similar manner to cross slip sources. The action of glissile junctions can be envisaged in a similar manner as the action of cross slip sources, however, we need to take into account that only a very limited number of reactions can produce a glissile junction. Suppose that two dislocations of slip systems β and β produce a glissile junction that can act as a source on system β. The density of segments on β that form junctions with β is f β β gj ρ β and the length of the junctions is of the order of the dislocation spacing on slip

19 Monavari and Zaiser Page 19 of 31 system β, r gj = 1/ ρ β and vice versa. Hence we get ρ β gj β q β gj β β β πf β β gj v β ρ β ρ β + πf β β gj v β ρ β ρ β, (51) π(f β β gj + f β β gj ρ )v β ρβ β η, (5) ρ (1)β gj = 0, (53) ρ ()β gj = 1 I() ρ β gj. (54) The strain associated with loop generation is γ gj = β πηbf β β gj v β ρ β + πηbf β β v β ρ β β gj (55) The total generation rate is given by summing contributions of all sources. We note that the action of dynamic sources and recombination processes is kinematically irreversible. Consequently, by reversing the direction of the velocity, recombination mechanisms do not act as sources and vice versa. 5 CDD (0) : a model for early stages of work hardening We now use the previous considerations to establish a model for the early stages of work hardening. In doing so we make the simplifying assumption that the composition of the dislocation arrangement, i.e. the distribution of dislocations over the different slip systems, does not change in the course of work hardening. This is essentially correct for deformation in high-symmetry orientations but not for deformation in single slip conditions. We thus focus on one representative slip system only and assume that all other densities scale in proportion. Since the DODF of CDD (0) is uniform (ρ β (ϕ) = ρβ π ), the climb and cross recombination rates can be combined into one set of equations: ρ ann = 4d ann vρ q ann = q ρ ρ ann (56) where d ann is an effective annihilation distance. We note that recombination does not affect the plastic slip γ. We only consider loop generation by double-cross-slip sources and glissile junctions which have the same structure. Therefore their contribution can be combined into one set of equations: ρ src = c src vρ 1.5, q src = c src η vρ, γ src = b c srcvρ. (57) Closing the kinematic equations (8) and (9) at zeroth order together with the contribution of annihilation and sources gives the semi-phenomenological

20 Monavari and Zaiser Page 0 of 31 G 48[MPa] b 0.56[nm] α 0.15 T 1 ρ [m ] q 10 1 [m 3 ] d ann 1 b c src 0.04 η 1/c src Table 1 Material properties, initial values of dislocation densities of Copper. CDD (0) evolution equations: t ρ = qv + ρ ann + ρ src (58) t q = q ann + q src (59) t γ = ρbv + γ src (60) For quasi-static loading the sum of internal stresses should balance the applied resolved shear stress. For homogeneous dislocation microstructure the dominant internal stresses are a friction like flow stress τ f αbg ρ and a self interaction stress associated to line tension of curved dislocations approximated as τ lt T Gb q ρ where G denotes the shear modulus and non dimensional parameters α = and T 1 (Zaiser et al., 007). Therefore the applied stress becomes: τ ext = τ f + τ lt = αbg ρ + T Gb q ρ (61) Using these relations we can build a semi-phenomenological model for work hardening. We fit the parameters of the model to the stage III hardening rate (θ = τ/ γ) of copper during large strain rolling obtained by Zehetbauer and Seumer (1993). Interestingly, the model captures also the stages I and II. The initial values and material properties are given in table(5). The initial microstructure consists of a small density of low curvature dislocation loops which have low flow stress and line tension. This facilitates the free flow of dislocations which is the characteristic of the first stage of work hardening (marked with (I) in Fig. 8). The initial growth of dislocation density is associated with expansion of dislocation loops. In this stage the curvature of microstructure w.r.t. dislocation spacing rapidly increases which indicates that dislocations become more and more entangled. This can be parametrized by the variable ϕ = q/(ρ) 1.5. As density increases, the dynamic sources become more prominent. New dislocation loops are generated and the curvature of the system increases. In the second stage, the hardening rate τ/ γ reaches its maximum around τ = G/00. The growth rate of dislocation density decreases which indicates the start of dynamic recovery through recombination of dislocations. In the third stage, the hardening rate decreases monotonically as dislocation density saturates. The late stages of hardening (IV, V) exhibit themselves as a plateau at the end of the hardening rate plot and are associated with dislocation cell formation. Therefore CDD (0) cannot capture these stages. To capture these stages, one might need to use higher order non local models such as CDD (1) and CDD () which are cable of capturing cell formation (Sandfeld and Zaiser, 015).

21 Monavari and Zaiser Page 1 of 31 Figure 8 First 3 stages of work hardening in cooper rolling. Top-left: resolved shear stress against plastic slip. Top-right: hardening-rate against resolved shear stress. Experimental measures marked by [ ] obtained from Zehetbauer and Seumer (1993). 6 Summary and Conclusion We revisited the continuum dislocation dynamics (CDD) theory which describes conservative motion of dislocations in terms of series of hierarchical evolution equations of dislocation alignment tensors. Unlike SVDD theories based on Kröner-Nye tensor which measures the excess dislocation density, in CDD, dislocations of different orientation can coexisted within a computational point. Due to this fundamental difference, in CDD, dislocations interactions should be dealt with a different approach than in GND-based theories. We introduced models for climb and crossslip annihilation mechanisms in higher dimensional setting. The annihilation rate of alignment tensors for two especial case of the first and the second order CDD theories, CDD (1) and CDD () were calculated in Appendix A and Appendix B. Later we discussed models for incorporating the activation of Frank-Read, double cross slip and glissile junction sources in CDD theory. Due to the dynamic nature of source mechanisms, ensemble of DDD simulations are needed to characterize the correlation matrices which emerge in the continuum formulation of these mechanisms. We layout the structure of the first and second order CDD theories with annihilation and sources in Appendix C and Appendix D respectively. We demonstrated that by including annihilation and generation mechanism in CDD theory, even zeroth-order CDD theory (CDD (0) ) obtained by truncating the evolution equations at scalar level, can describe the first 3 stages of work hardening. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

22 Monavari and Zaiser Page of 31 Author s contributions M.M. developed the proposed annihilation and generation models, implemented the simulation model, and prepared the manuscript with advices from M.Z. in all stages. M.Z. analysed and corrected the model and designed presented example and extensively edited the manuscript. Acknowledgements Financial support of... References Arsenlis, A., Parks, D.M., Becker, R., Bulatov, V.V.j.: On the evolution of crystallographic dislocation density in non-homogeneously deforming crystals. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 5, (004) Devincre, B., Kubin, L., Hoc, T.: Collinear superjogs and the low-stress response of fcc crystals. Scr. Mater. 57(10), (007). doi: /j.scriptamat Essmann, U., Mughrabi, H.: Annihilation of dislocations during tensile and cyclic deformation and limits of dislocation densities. Philos. Mag. A 40, (1979) Frank, F.C., Read, W.T.: Multiplication processes for slow moving dislocations. Phys. Rev. 79, 7 73 (1950). doi: /physrev.79.7 Groma, I.: Link between the microscopic and mesoscopic length-scale description of the collective behavior of dislocations. Phys. Rev. B 56, (1997) Groma, I., Csikor, F.F., Zaiser, M.: Spatial correlations and higher-order gradient terms in a continuum description of dislocation dynamics. Acta Mater. 51, (003) Hirth, J.P., Lothe, J.: Theory of Dislocations. Krieger Publishing Company,??? (198) Hochrainer, T.: Evolving systems of curved dislocations: Mathematical foundations of a statistical theory. PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe, IZBS (006) Hochrainer, T.: Multipole expansion of continuum dislocations dynamics in terms of alignment tensors. Philos. Mag. 95, (015). Hochrainer, T., Zaiser, M., Gumbsch, P.: A three-dimensional continuum theory of dislocation systems: kinematics and mean-field formulation. Philos. Mag. 87, (007) Hochrainer, T.: Thermodynamically consistent continuum dislocation dynamics. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 88, 1 (016). doi: /j.jmps Hussein, A.M., Rao, S.I., Uchic, M.D., Dimiduk, D.M., El-Awady, J.A.: Microstructurally based cross-slip mechanisms and their effects on dislocation microstructure evolution in fcc crystals. Acta Mater. 85, (015). doi: /j.actamat Koehler, J.S.: The nature of work-hardening. Phys. Rev. 86, 5 59 (195). doi: /physrev.86.5 Kosevich, A.M.: Crystal dislocations and the theory of elasticity. Disloc. Solids Vol. 1, (1979) Kröner, E.: Kontinuumstheorie der Versetzungen und Eigenspannungen. Springer,??? (1958) Kusov, A.A., Vladimirov, V.I.: The theory of dynamic annihilation of dislocations. Phys. Status Solidi (B) 138(1), (1986). doi:10.100/pssb Leung, P.S.S., Leung, H.S., Cheng, B., Ngan, A.H.W.: Size dependence of yield strength simulated by a dislocation-density function dynamics approach. Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 3, (015) Li, J.: Dislocation nucleation: Diffusive origins. Nat. Mater. 14, (015). doi: /nmat436 Messerschmidt, U., Bartsch, M.: Generation of dislocations during plastic deformation. Mater. Chem. Phys. 81(3), (003). doi: /s (03) Monavari, M., Sandfeld, S., Zaiser, M.: Continuum representation of systems of dislocation lines: A general method for deriving closed-form evolution equations. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 95, (016). doi: /j.jmps Monavari, M., Zaiser, M., Sandfeld, S.: Comparison of closure approximations for continuous dislocation dynamics. Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc (014). doi: /opl Motz, C., Weygand, D., Senger, J., Gumbsch, P.: Initial dislocation structures in 3-d discrete dislocation dynamics and their influence on microscale plasticity. Acta Mater. 57(6), (009). doi: /j.actamat Mura, T.: Continuous distribution of moving dislocations. Philos. Mag. 8, (1963) Nye, J.F.: Some geometrical relations in dislocated crystals. Acta Metall. 1, (1953) Pauš, P., Kratochvíl, J., BeneŠ, M.: A dislocation dynamics analysis of the critical cross-slip annihilation distance and the cyclic saturation stress in fcc single crystals at different temperatures. Acta Mater. 61(0), (013). doi: /j.actamat Reuber, C., Eisenlohr, P., Roters, F., Raabe, D.: Dislocation density distribution around an indent in single-crystalline nickel: Comparing nonlocal crystal plasticity finite-element predictions with experiments. Acta Mater. 71, (014) Sandfeld, S., Hochrainer, T., Zaiser, M., Gumbsch, P.: Numerical implementation of a 3d continuum theory of dislocation dynamics and application to microbending. Philos. Mag. 90, (010) Sandfeld, S., Zaiser, M.: Pattern formation in a minimal model of continuum dislocation plasticity. Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 3, (015) Sedláček, R., Kratochvíl, J., Werner, E.: The importance of being curved: bowing dislocations in a continuum description. Philos. Mag. 83, (003) Steif, P.S., Clifton, R.J.: On the kinetics of a frank-read source. Mater. Sci. Eng. 41(), (1979). doi: / (79) Stricker, M., Weygand, D.: Dislocation multiplication mechanisms glissile junctions and their role on the plastic deformation at the microscale. Acta Mater. 99, (015). doi: /j.actamat Wu, R., Sandfeld, S.: Insights from a minimal model of dislocation-assisted rafting in single crystal nickel-based superalloys. Scripta Materialia 13, 4 45 (016)

23 Monavari and Zaiser Page 3 of 31 Wu, R., Zaiser, M., Sandfeld, S.: A continuum approach to combined γ/γ evolution and dislocation plasticity in nickel-based superalloys. International Journal of Plasticity 95, (017a) Wu, R., Tüzes, D., Ispánovity, P.D., Groma, I., Zaiser, M.: Deterministic and stochastic models of dislocation patterning. arxiv preprint arxiv: (017b) Xia, S., El-Azab, A.: Computational modelling of mesoscale dislocation patterning and plastic deformation of single crystals. Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 3, (015) Xia, S., Belak, J., El-Azab, A.: The discrete-continuum connection in dislocation dynamics: I. time coarse graining of cross slip. Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 4(7), (016) Xiang, Y.: Continuum approximation of the Peach-Koehler force on dislocations in a slip plane. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 57, (009) Zaiser, M.: Local density approximation for the energy functional of three-dimensional dislocation systems. Phys. Rev. B 9, (015). doi: /physrevb Zaiser, M., Miguel, M.-C., Groma, I.: Statistical dynamics of dislocation systems: The influence of dislocation-dislocation correlations. Phys. Rev. B 64, 410 (001) Zaiser, M., Nikitas, N., Hochrainer, T., Aifantis, E.: Modelling size effects using 3d density-based dislocation dynamics. Philos. Mag. 87(8-9), (007) Zehetbauer, M., Seumer, V.: Cold work hardening in stages iv and v of f.c.c. metals i. experiments and interpretation. Acta Metall. Mater. 41(), (1993). doi: / (93)90088-a Zhu, Y., Xiang, Y.: A continuum model for dislocation dynamics in three dimensions using the dislocation density potential functions and its application to micro-pillars. J. Mech. Phys. Solids (In press) (015)

24 Monavari and Zaiser Page 4 of 31 Appendix A: Climb annihilation in CDD (1) and CDD () The climb annihilation rate of alignment tensors in CDD (1) and CDD () can be written in terms of the moment functions: ρ (k) cb = 4y cb vρρf (k) cb (λ1, ϕρ), (6) where ρ (k) = ρm (k) is the first component of the k-th order alignment tensor in the rotated coordinate system where the GND vector is parallel to x direction. f (k) cb is the climb annihilation function of order k: f (k) cb ρ (k) cb [ ] ϕ+ π = p(ϕ) p(π + θ ϕ) cos (ϕ θ)(cos k (ϕ) s ϕ π (l 1 )k )dθ dϕ (63) [ ] ϕ+ π = p(ϕ) p(π + θ ϕ) cos (ϕ θ)(cos k (ϕ) (s 1 )k )dθ dϕ (64) ϕ π ( s ) k 1 [ ] = 4y cbvρ Θ( ϕ ϕ + ϕ π ) cos (ϕ) l (k) (ϕ) sin(ϕ) l (k) (π/) dϕ dϕ [ ] 4y cb vρ Θ( ϕ ϕ + ϕ 3π ) cos (ϕ) l (k) (ϕ) sin(ϕ) l (k) (3π/) dϕ dϕ. (65) Since climb annihilation can be initiated from any angle, for a symmetric DODF, the rate of the climb annihilation does not depend on the GND angle. We obtain the DODF of CDD (1) by truncating the (1) at the first order: p(ϕ) = 1 exp( λ1 cos(ϕ ϕρ)) (66) Z Therefore, the annihilation rate of ρ becomes: ρ cb = 4y cb vρρf (0) cb (λ1, ϕρ), (67) where f (0) cb (λ1, ϕρ) is the zeroth-order climb annihilation function defined as: f (0) 1 cb (λ1, ϕρ) = Z [ ϕ+ π ϕ π exp( λ 1 cos(ϕ ϕ ρ)) (68) ] exp( λ 1 cos(π + θ ϕ ϕ ρ)) cos (ϕ θ)(1 s )dθ dϕ. Given that the DODF of CDD (1) is symmetric around the GND angle ϕ ρ, f (0) cb can be derived as a function of the only Lagrangian multiplier λ 1. However it is more physically intuitive to express this rate as a function of the corresponding first dislocation moment M (1) = ρ (1) /ρ, which can be understood as the GND fraction of the total dislocation density. As depicted in Fig. 9, f (0) cb does not correspond to the parabolic rate expected by bimolecular annihilation of straight dislocation lines. The annihilation of ρ can be approximated by: ρ cb = 1.y cb vρρ(1 1.5(M (1) ) + 0.5(M (1) ) 6 ). (69) The symmetric DODF of CDD () is obtained by truncating the (1) at the second order: p(ϕ) = 1 Z exp( λ1 cos(ϕ ϕρ) λ cos (ϕ ϕ ρ)) (70) Similar to the CDD (1), the annihilation rate of the first three moment function of CDD () can be calculated using this DODF: ρ cb = 4y cb vρρf (0) cb (M (1), M () ), (71) ρ (1) 1 = 4y cb vρf (1) cb (M (1), M () ) = 0, (7) cb ρ () 11 = 4y cb vρf () cb (M (1), M () ). (73) cb

25 Monavari and Zaiser Page 5 of annihilation function f (0) cb 0.1 approx 1-x GND fraction Figure 9 Blue line: climb annihilation function of ρ as a function of the GND fraction. Green dashed-line: analytical fit (0.3(1 1.5x + 0.5x 6 )) to the annihilation rate. Red line: parabolic rate (0.5(1 x )) predicted by bimolecular annihilation. Note that the first order annihilation function is always zero by definition (f (1) cb = 0). Fig. 10 depicts the zeroth and second order annihilation functions and their analytical approximation as functions of M (1) and M () : f (0) cb (M (1), M () ) (0.8(M ().5) + 0.3)(1 (M (1) ) ), (74) f () cb (M (1), M () ) 0.5M () (1 (M (1) ) ). (75) In the limit case of M () = 1, where dislocations become parallel straight lines, annihilation functions converge to parabolic bi-molecular annihilation. The annihilation rate of ρ () can be evaluated using the relation between moment functions and alignment tensors given by Monavari et al. (016): ρ () cb = ρ () 11 cbl ρ l ρ + ( ρ cb ρ () 11 cb)l ρ l ρ (76) [ = 4y cb vρρ f () cb lρ l ρ + (f (0) cb f () cb )lρ l ρ ]. Assuming an equi-convex microstructure, the annihilation rate of the total curvature density can be straightforwardly evaluated from the dislocation density annihilation rate: q cb = ρ cb q ρ. (77) The concomitant reduction in dislocation curvature density decreases the elongation (source) term vq in the evolution equation of the total dislocation density (8) an effect which has an important long-term impact on the evolution of the dislocation microstructure and may outweigh the direct effect of annihilation. The total annihilation rate is the sum of annihilation by cross slip and climb mechanisms. Appendix B: Cross slip annihilation in CDD (1) and CDD () B.1 Cross slip annihilation in CDD (1) The cross slip annihilation rate of DODF in CDD (1) can be calculated by plugging the DODF of CDD (1) given by (66) into (6). Assuming that the dislocations have a smooth angular distribution which can be approximated as constant over the small angle interval ϕ, (6) can be further simplified: ρ cs(ϕ) = 8 ϕy csvρ(ϕ)ρ(π ϕ) cos (ϕ)(1 sin(ϕ) ) (78) = 8 ϕy csv ρρ Z exp( λ1 cos(ϕ ϕρ) λ1 cos(π (ϕ ϕρ))) cos (ϕ)(1 sin(ϕ) ) The annihilation rate of the zeroth order alignment tensor (total dislocation density) is given by integrating (78) over all orientations: ρ cs = 8 ϕy 1 csvρρ Z exp( λ 1 cos(ϕ ϕ ρ) λ 1 cos(π (ϕ ϕ ρ))) cos (ϕ)(1 sin(ϕ) )dϕ = 8 ϕvy csρρf 0 cs. (79)

26 Monavari and Zaiser Page 6 of 31 Figure 10 Left column: the Zeroth and the second order annihilation functions as functions of M (1) and M (). Center column: polynomial approximations of the annihilation functions. Right column: absolute errors of the approximations. f 0 cs is a function of the symmetry angle of DODF ϕρ and the Lagrangian multiplier λ1 or the corresponding M (1). We are especially interested in limit cases where the DODF is symmetric around the screw orientation and edge orientation which correspond to the axes of Fig. 1(right). In the first case the GND vector is aligned with the screw orientations ϕ ρ = 0 and ϕ ρ = π such that ρ(ϕ) = ρ( ϕ) and M (1) = ρ 1/ρ. Hence (79) becomes: ρ cs = 4y csv(ρ) ϕ Z [ ] cos (ϕ)(1 sin(ϕ) )dϕ y csv = 4y csv(ρ) ϕ Z (π 4 ), (80) 3 where Z is a function of the first moment M (1). The second case corresponds to a microstructure where ρ(ϕ) = ρ(π ϕ). Using this symmetry property and the DODF given by (66), the rate of reduction in total dislocation density in CDD (1) can be evaluated as ρ cs = 4y csv(ρ) ϕ Z [ ] exp( λ 1 sin(ϕ)) cos (ϕ)(1 sin(ϕ) )dϕ. (81) For a completely isotropic dislocation arrangement, λ 1 = 0 and Z = π, we obtain in both cases: ρ cs = 4y csv(ρ) ( ϕ 4π )(π 4 ). (8) 3 Fig. 11 compares these two limit cases with the parabolic dependency expected according to kinetic theory for a system of straight parallel dislocations (dashed red line). In general, the annihilation rate can be approximated by interpolating between these two cases. Fig. 1 shows the annihilation rate, normalized by the value at M (1) = 0, as a function of the GND fraction M (1) and the GND angle ϕ ρ or the corresponding screw and edge components of the normalized GND vector ρ (1) /ρ. We can see that the annihilation rate decreases monotonically with increasing GND fraction and goes to zero if all dislocations are GND. Assuming an equi-convex microstructure, the annihilation rate of curvature density becomes: q cs = ρ cs q ρ. (83) B. Cross slip annihilation in CDD () The cross slip annihilation rate of the second order alignment tensors in CDD () can be calculated by plugging the corresponding DODF into (6). Assuming the symmetric DODF given by (70) the annihilation rate of ρ () takes

27 Monavari and Zaiser Page 7 of 31 Normalized annihilation rate ϕ ρ = 0 cos( π M (1) ) ϕ ρ = π/ 1 (M (1) ) GND fraction Figure 11 Normalized annihilation rate as a function of the GND fraction M (1) for a dislocation annihilation triggered by cross slip. Blue line: normalized annihilation rate for a DODF symmetric around screw orientation (ϕ ρ = 0, π). Red line: normalized annihilation rate for a DODF symmetric around edge orientation (ϕ ρ = π, 3π ). Dashed lines: Parabolic annihilation rate expected from the kinetic theory. the form of:: ρ () cs = 4vy csρρf () cs (λ1, λ, ϕρ) (84) where f () cs is a symmetric second order tensorial function of the symmetry angle ϕ ρ and the Lagrangian multipliers λ 1 and λ (or their corresponding first two moment functions). Each component of f () cs can be approximated by 3 dimensional tables (or 4 dimensional in case of full DODF). Fig. 13 and Fig. 14 depict two slice of the 3D annihilation tables of ρ and ρ () which correspond to symmetric DODFs around screw (ϕ ρ = 0) and edge (ϕ ρ = π ) orientations respectively. For the corresponding orientation interval we use the value ϕ = ±15 given by Hussein et al. (015). Fig. 13 shows that, in the limiting cases where all dislocations are screw oriented, i.e. M () = 1 and ρ(ϕ) = ρ +δ(ϕ) + ρ δ(π ϕ), the annihilation rate follows as ρ + cs = ρ cs = 4ρ +ρ y csv, (85) which is the result expected by kinetic theory for particles moving in a D space with velocity v in opposite directions and annihilating if they pass within a reaction cross-section y cs. Appendix C: Evolution equations of CDD (1) The total dislocation density ρ, the dislocation density vector ρ (1), and the total curvature density q are the kinematic variables of CDD (1). In order to reconstruct the DODF and approximate ρ (), first we have to calculate the average line direction l ρ, the symmetry angle ϕ ρ and the first moment function M (1) : l ρ = ρ (1) / ρ (1) = [l 1, l ] = [cos(ϕ ρ), sin(ϕ ρ)], (86) ϕ ρ = tan 1 ( l l 1 ), (87) M (1) = ρ (1) /ρ (0). (88) We also remind that operator ( ) normalizes quantities with ρ; e.g. ρ 1 = ρ(1) 1 ρ. M () and ρ () can be approximated as (Monavari et al., 016): M () [ + (M (1) ) + (M (1) ) 6 ]/4. (89) [ ρ () ρ M () l ρ l ρ + (1 M () )l ρ l ρ ] (90) [ = ρ [M () l ] [ 1 l 1l l 1l l + (1 M () l ]] ) l 1l l 1l l. 1

28 Monavari and Zaiser Page 8 of 31 Figure 1 Left: cross slip annihilation function f ann of total dislocation density in CDD (1) plotted in polar coordinates with the first dislocation moment M (1) as distance to the origin and the GND angle ϕ ρ. The equivalent Cartesian coordinates are the screw and edge components of the normalized GND vector ρ (1) = ρ (1) /ρ. Middle: analytical approximation of the annihilation rate f cs = ( ρ 1 ) cos ( π ρ(1) ) + ( ρ ρ ) (1 ( ρ(1) ) ρ ). Right: the absolute error of the approximation. Figure 13 Cross slip annihilation functions of ρ, ρ () 11 and ρ() in CDD() for a DODF symmetric around screw orientation (ϕ ρ = 0). For this symmetry angle M (1) = ρ 1 /ρ and M () = ρ 11 /ρ. Bimolecular annihilation corresponds to the upper limit of M () = 1. The curvature density vector is approximated using an equiconvex assumption: Q (1) = (ρ (1) ) q ρ. (91) The cross slip annihilation rate of ρ is a function of M (1), l ρ and cross slip distance y cs (79): ρ cs = vy csρρf 0 cs ( ), (9) 3π where f cs = ( ρ 1) cos ( π ρ(1) ρ ) + ( ρ ) (1 ( ρ(1) ρ ) ).. The climb annihilation rate of ρ is a function of M (1) and climb distance y cs: ρ cb = 4y cb vρρf cb, (93)

29 Monavari and Zaiser Page 9 of 31 Figure 14 Cross slip annihilation functions of ρ, ρ () 11 and ρ() in CDD() for a DODF symmetric around edge orientation (ϕ ρ = π ). For this symmetry angle M (1) = ρ /ρ and M () = ρ /ρ. with f cb 0.3(1 1.5(M (1) ) + 0.5(M (1) ) 6 ). The dislocation generation rate attributed to the activation of Frank-Read sources, and cross slip sources together with glissile junctions are respectively: ρ fr = π 5 vρ 3 fr, (94) q fr = π 5 vρ fr, (95) γ fr = πηv ρfr, (96) ρ dcs = β πf dcs vρ s ρ β, (97) q dcs = β γ dcs = β ρ gj = β q gj = β γ gj = β π f dcs η vρsρβ, (98) πηbf ββ dcs vβ ρ β s πf β β gj v β ρ β ρ β + πf β β gj v β ρ β ρ β, β (100) πf β β gj v β ρ β ρ β + πf β β gj v β ρ β ρ β, β (101) πηbf β β gj v β ρ β + πηbf β β gj v β ρ β, β (10) (99) where ρ fr is the density of the dislocation segments acting as static Frank-Read sources, f dcs and f gj are a correlation matrices that relate the dislocation densities to activation of cross slip sources and glissile junctions on the considered slip system. Like cross slip annihilation rate, screw dislocation density ρ s is a function of ρ and ρ (1) and as depicted in can be estimated as ρ s ((ρ 1) + (ρ ) ) (1.1( ρ1)6 1.4( ρ 1) ( ρ 1) 14.16( ρ ) 4.( ρ ) ( ρ ) 8 ). (103) Total annihilation and source rates of ρ and q then become: ρ ann = ρ cs + ρ cb, (104) q ann = q ρann, ρ (105) ρ src = ρ fr + ρ dcs + ρ gj, (106) q src = q fr + q dcs + q gj, (107) γ src = γ fr + γ dcs + γ gj. (108)

30 Monavari and Zaiser Page 30 of 31 Figure 15 Ratio of screw dislocation density ρ s/ρ as a function of GND vector and total dislocation density. Left: Evaluated from integrating the DODF of CDD (1) using (45); Middle: Analytical approximation of screw density ratio given by (103); Right: the absolute error of the estimation. We note that source activation and annihilation do not change the GND vector ρ (1). The evolution equations for ρ, ρ (1), and q then take the form: ρ = (vε ρ (1) ) + vq + ρ src + ρ ann, (109) ρ (1) = (vερ), (110) q = (vq (1) ρ () v) + q src + q ann, (111) γ = ρvb + γ src (11) The only missing parameters of this system of equations are the correlation matrices. Appendix D: Evolution equations of CDD () CDD () is constructed by following the evolution of ρ () in addition to ρ (1) and q. Similar to CDD (1), first we calculate the average line direction l ρ, the symmetry angle ϕ ρ and the first two moment function M (1) and M () : l ρ = ρ (1) / ρ (1) = [l 1, l ] = [cos(ϕ ρ), sin(ϕ ρ)], (113) ϕ ρ = tan 1 ( l l 1 ), (114) M (1) = ρ (1) /ρ (0), (115) ( ) M () = ρ () 11 l1l1 + ρ() 1 l1l + ρ() ll /ρ. (116) ρ (3) is then given by approximated as: ρ (3) /ρ =M (3) l ρ l ρ l ρ (117) ( + M (1) M (3)) (l ρ l ρ l ρ + l ρ l ρ l ρ + l ρ l ρ l ρ ), where the third order moment function M (3) vector is given by the divergence of ρ () : is approximated as M (3) M (1) M (). The curvature density q (1) = divρ (). (118) The second order auxiliary curvature density becomes: Q () = q [ (1 + Φ)q (1) q (1) + (1 Φ)q (1) q (1) ], (119) q (1) where Φ ( q (1) /q) (1 + ( q /q) 4 )/.