Theory of Workhardening 1934-1984

DORIS KUHLMANN-WILSDORF

The evolution of the theory of workhardening through the past fifty years has laid a secure basis, but
much research still lies ahead. A guiding principle in the prevailing, so-called meshlength theory is
that glide dislocations arrange into stress-screened, low-energy structures, the most common being the
cell structure, and that the flow stress is the stress needed to generate new glide dislocations. Further,
it makes extensive use of the "principle of similitude". Remnant stresses due to dislocations with just
one Burgers vector orientation are very often relieved by additional dislocations with other Burgers
vectors which form not in response to the applied stress but to those remnant stresses. Such dis-
locations are commonly misnamed "forest" dislocations. The theory closely reproduces stages II and
III of the typical workhardening curve. Stage I results in single glide from sources which initially are
isolated from each other so that pile-ups form, which then may interact among neighboring pile-ups
of opposite sign, so as to generate mats of dipoles parallel to the active glide plane. Stage II behavior
is expected as long as similitude is obeyed so that the average free dislocation path shrinks inversely
proportional with the root of the dislocation density. Stage III, finally, results when the free dislocation
path is constant. At low temperatures, thermal activation can make the critical difference for the
release of hair-trigger poised loops. This is the cause of creep effects whose magnitude is limited to
less than the elastic strain. Computer calculations indicate the presence of longer-range (i.e., cell
diameter scale) stresses whose sign changes with the cell's sense of rotation. This suggests that
rectangled dislocation cells with a common rotation axis, arranged into a three-dimensional checker-
board pattern in which the sense of rotation alternates from cell to cell, should minimize stored
energy. Such cell patterns are increasingly reported in the literature. The fact that the average cell
diameter tends to be inversely proportional to the applied stress is also readily explained through those
stresses. In retrospect, Taylor's theory of workhardening may be recognized as a variant of the
meshlength theory of stage III, in that it is based on a stress-screened network obeying the principle
of similitude while the free dislocation path, given by the spacing between the mosaic block walls,
remains constant.

I. EARLY THEORIES identified with the generation of dislocations and also

A. The Introduction of the Dislocation Concept into
Materials Science
W H E N , in 1934, Orowan, 1-5 Polanyi, 6 and Taylor7 almost
simultaneously introduced the dislocation concept into solid
state theory, they immediately applied it to the plastic prop-
erties of metals. Specifically, G. I. Taylor7 derived a "static"
theory of workhardening on the basis of dislocation stress
interactions, and E. Orowan 1-5 contributed a character-
istically wide range of ideas pertaining to the "dynamic"
concept of crystal plasticity. In fact, Orowan developed a
rather comprehensive system of geometrical considerations
and equations built on Richard Becker's basic thought8'9 that
the plastic properties of crystalline materials could be under-
stood through a strongly stress-dependent flow rate. This
suggestion had found support through some preliminary
measurements by Becker and Boas 8'1~but was at variance
with the prevailing "static" concept according to which in
crystalline materials there exists a direct correlation between
stress and strain, in contrast to amorphous materials ex-
hibiting viscous flow, i.e., a direct correlation between
stress and flow rate, but not between stress and strain.
Orowan's 1934/5 series of papers 1-5 was triggered by his
insight that the previously unexplained elementary glide
processes appearing in Becker's theory could be variously
DORIS KUHLMANN-WILSDORF is University Professor of Applied
Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22901.
This paper is based on a presentation made at the symposium "50th
Anniversary of the Introduction of Dislocations" held at the fall meeting
of the TMS-AIME in Detroit, Michigan in October 1984 under the TMS-
AIME Mechanical Metallurgy and Physical Metallurgy Committees.
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
with increments in their motion. Orowan did not invent
the dislocation concept, however, but gave full credit to
Polanyi, citing Reference 6 and saying that the "effect of
'dislocations' to enhance plasticity has been recognized by
Polanyi already for years." In turn, Polanyi6 acknowledged
his indebtedness to earlier concepts which prefigured dis-
locations, including those due to Prandtl,l~ Dehlinger, 12and
his own with Masing.13
None of these, but only G.I. Taylor, realized that in
mathematics dislocations already had a long history, and
that the geometry and stresses of dislocations of various
types had already been extensively treated by mathe-
maticians. In his workhardening theory7 he employed the
solutions for the stresses of straight edge dislocations, which
he found in Love's book. 14 Thus Taylor incidentally also
introduced the word "dislocations", whereas the German
word "Versetzungen" appears to have been coined by
M. Polanyi.
Alas, only very few scientists continued to be interested
in creep and workhardening and almost no additions were
made to dislocation theory as such for a number of years,
even while the dislocation concept was used in discussions
of metal plasticity. Prominent contributors in this endeavor
were W. G. Burgers and J. M. Burgers, 15'16'17U. Dehlinger, ~8
and A. KochendiSrfer. 19"2~They mostly concluded that the
already considerable knowledge then available on crystal
plasticity, so exquisitely presented by Schmid and Boas
in their famed book 2~ as well as by Ms. Elam, 22 could in-
deed best be explained in terms of dislocation behavior--
and this includes Schmid and Boas themselves in their
chapter VIII. 21
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985--2091
 Overall the view emerged that in the course of plastic
deformation the crystal developed, if it did not already pos-
sess one from its earlier history, a mosaic block structure,
and that the dislocations could move rather freely through
obstacles, among them dislocations themselves. Thermal
activation, triggering elementary glide processes as pro-
posed by Becker/Orowan, was accepted by all as im-
portantly involved in plastic deformation, perhaps even to
the exclusion of any true workhardening. And also uni-
formly accepted was the existence of "notches" or other
stress raisers in whose vicinity the applied stress would
be multiplied manyfold and where dislocations would be
generated.
During World War II academic research was slowed to a
snail's pace, and research into crystal plasticity resumed in
full force only in 1947. Until that time, with minor excep-
tions, dislocations in plastic deformation were considered to
be straight and of edge type. Correspondingly, little or no
attention was paid to the problems and opportunities asso-
ciated with the termination of dislocations other than at
surfaces, and with the possible curvature of dislocations,
let alone that they might not wholly lie on only one
crystallographic slip plane but be configured in three
dimensions. Those ideas were evolved only slowly and with
considerable difficulty. For example, this writer vividly re-
members a session with R. Becker, G. Leibfried, and
K. Liicke, among others, when in 1948, in Germany, they
tried to understand the concept of screw dislocations which
had been introduced by J. M. Burgers in 193923 in papers
which had remained unknown due to wartime and had be-
come available only then.
In retrospect it almost seems comical how all present had
to strain very hard to grasp that concept even though they
were thoroughly familiar with the 1934/5 papers of Orowan,
Polanyi, and Taylor ~-7 and in the case of the present writer
had already completed a masters and a doctoral thesis 24 on
the creep of metal wires, and had developed a theory of
metal recovery, 25 in all of which the theoretical inter-
pretations were based on dislocation behavior.
B. Dynamic Versus Static Theories of Workhardening
In his fundamental papers 8'9'1~Becker had argued that in
contrast to viscous flow of amorphous materials, in which
all molecules may be regarded as equivalent, crystal plas-
ticity depended on the activation of specific areas, of vol-
ume V, such that in these some critical stress, say o'cnt, be
attained. This, then, would trigger an increment of plastic
deformation, say A, which he provisionally assumed to be
proportional to the applied stress. Increments of plastic flow
would thus occur at an applied stress, O'a, whenever through
thermal activation locally the existing elastic strain energy
V~r2a/2E (with E designating Young's modulus) was raised to
If in this theory the individual glide step is identified with
either the creation or movement of dislocations, Young's
modulus, E, must be replaced by the shear modulus, G, and
the tensile stresses o"a and trent by shear stresses ra and 'Tcrit.
The meaning of rent in this context is indeed problematical
and in References 1 through 5 it is referred to with mildly
different wordings, but on balance Orowan seemingly iden-
tified it with the theoretical shear strength of the material on
the active glide plane in the active glide direction. Further,
2092--VOLUME 16A, D E C E M B E R 1985
Orowan assumed the elementary glide step energy to be
independent of the applied stress and, including the then
familiar stress multiplication factor q, Orowan thus found
for the plastic flow strain rate
aT~at = c exp{-[V(~'cnt- q~'a)z]/2GkT}. [1]
Ever since the fundamental paper of Voigt 26 the need for
a stress multiplication factor, q, in the context of the for-
mation of crystal defects was taken for granted, and it was
understood to be quite large as indicated by the wide gaps
between theoretical shear strengths of ideal crystals and the
actual yield stresses of samples, down to the softest single
crystal. The favored volume elements within which glide
was triggered by thermal activation were clearly those with
the highest notch factors, and were presumed to be situated
either at some microscopic interior or surface notches, or at
some other stress raisers.
In line with Becker's thinking, Orowan pointed out that
the macroscopic yield stress could be identified with that
applied stress at which the specimen deforms at the flow rate
imposed by the testing conditions, and that the dependence
of the plastic flow rate on the applied stress would generally
be so very steep that already minor reductions in the stress
would lead to a virtual cessation of plastic deformation,
while even the highest practically attainable flow rates
would occur at only mildly increased stresses. He went on
to show that Eq. [1] therefore yields ('rc,~t q'ra) as propor-
-
tional to the root of the absolute temperature, so that the
yield stress should depend on temperature as
"/'y = Tcrit - - B X/T, [2]
a relationship which he found to be in good agreement with
observed data.
In References 1 through 5 we find among others the basic
equations for recovery creep, i.e., creep at constant tempera-
ture and stress in which the hardening due to the strain is
exactly counterbalanced by the "recovery" due to annealing
without any change in the metallographic structure, namely
Or Or dt = d r = 0 [3]
~-~ydy + Or
from which follows the shear strain rate
aT_ 0,/0
Y- dt Ot/Oy [4]
These equations he credited to Polanyi. Further we find a
discussion of dislocation pair and loop formation within
crystals that was years ahead of its time, and would almost
have led to the "discovery" of screw dislocations. Orowan
also recognized that dislocation avalanches could be trig-
gered by just one single dislocation and discussed the
spreading of dislocation movement out of the initially acti-
vated glide plane, leading to whole glide zones (not neces-
sarily touching any crystal surfaces), beginning with just
one triggering elementary glide increment. And finally we
may mention a perceptive brief discussion of the frictional
stress acting on dislocations in the ideal lattice. Orowan
recognized that this would be smallest for the most densely
packed and most widely spaced atomic planes, thereby ex-
plaining by means of dislocation theory why those planes
generally serve as active glide planes in crystals.
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
 All in all Orowan developed the concept that, besides
being the carders of glide, the dislocations themselves are
the sources of strong notch effects, i.e., stress enhancement,
and further provide defects which block the glide planes.
But yet, and unequivocally, the flow strain rate as mediated
through thermal activation at notch points in accordance
with the theory of Becker was for him the fundamental
phenomenon, not the hardening through accumulating de-
fects. Thus, on p. 576 of Reference 4: "Strain hardening is
basically an unimportant side effect of plastic flow."
By constrast, G. I. Taylor7proposed a quantitative "static"
theory of workhardening based on regular dislocation arrays
of low energy in equilibrium with the applied stress, con-
sisting of parallel rows of like edge dislocations whose sign
changes from row to row, now called the Taylor lattice.
In a simplified version, and considering only quadratic
dislocation arrays of spacing l, we may briefly summarize
the theory as follows: Since the dislocations could not be
formed within the crystal, they had to come from the crystal
or mosaic block boundaries (spaced L apart), so that the
average dislocation in the lattice had to have moved the
distance L / 2 , giving rise to the shear strain
y = obL/2 [5]
where b, as usual, designates the Burgers vector. Further,
the dislocation density, p, is related to the average dis-
location spacing, l, as
p = 1/I 2 [61
so that
9r = bL/Zt 2 [7]
Next Taylor's careful analysis of the stresses in the dis-
location array showed the stress required for shifting the
dislocation rows past each other so as to effect further glide
to be inversely proportional to the spacing, l, between adja-
cent rows. Therefore
,,- = c/t = ered to retard it. However, let it be said right away, although
and thus a parabolic workhardening law is found. Evidently,
also,
z = CX/-pp. [9]
Taylor accounted for the temperature dependence of the
yield stress by the assumption that the grain or mosaic block
boundaries (without which the Taylor dislocation lattice is
mechanically unstable), become more transparent to dis-
location motion with increasing temperature. It may be
noted here that Eq. [9] (in which the stress required to move
isolated dislocations is assumed to be negligible) has been
vindicated to the fullest extent, and has turned out to be one
of the most reliably robust relationships in all of plastic
deformation theory. However, the parabolic workhardening
law which he found is characteristic only of the so-called
stage III, whereas a roughly linear rise of stress with strain
is much more frequently found.
Other scientists took up these themes, mostly with em-
phasis on the Becker/Orowan dynamic interpretation, but
endeavoring also to combine the dynamic and the static
theories. Thus Kochendrrfer accepted Orowan's theoretical
work of References 1 through 5 almost completely but com-
plemented it with a few further concepts, e.g., that the
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
"dissolution" of dislocations at the end of the free part of
the glide plane requires almost as much thermal activa-
tion as the formation, so as to account for the gradual in-
crease of the dislocation population with strain. Further,
Kochendrrfer considered that typically the notch effect
at a site would not be exhausted with the emission of
one dislocation, so that several would follow each other on
the same glide plane. By the action of sources with alter-
nate sign on parallel glide planes, a Taylor lattice could
thus arise.
Quite similar views were also developed by W.G. and
J.M. Burgers, 15-17'23the latter a mathematician after whom
the Burgers vector is named, while the former was a
physicist/materials scientist with a profound knowledge of
metallic properties. They, too, argued that dislocations were
held up at mosaic boundaries and would be released in
sequences of similar dislocations. Here, then, we see the
beginnings of the concepts of dislocation sources and pile-
ups. Yet, the belief that dislocation formation depended on
thermal activation persisted, and thus no good synthesis
between the dynamic and static theory was possible.
Once one becomes aware of the discussed early history of
workhardening theory one finds the traces of it persisting
even now, in that the traditions of leaning toward the static
or dynamic interpretation have passed from teacher to pupil
to pupil. Herein; due to the towering influence of Becker
and Orowan and the early interest of N. E Mott and E R. N.
Nabarro in thermally activated processes involved in plastic
deformation, z7'28 the dynamic interpretation has received
comparatively more emphasis than the static interpretation.
Specifically, the tradition of crediting 'strong internal
stresses with a powerful influence on plastic deformation,
and in particular as the primary explanation for the great
hardness difference between annealed and strongly work-
hardened material, which was such an important feature
in the discussed early theories, is still with us; albeit the
notches are nowadays "dislocation pile-ups" and instead of
the internal stresses aiding the deformation they are consid-
perhaps somewhat prematurely, that internal stresses must
be balanced interiorly and therefore can never give rise to
hardening, since plastic deformation always occurs first at
the softest spots, those aided by favorable internal stresses.
We may also recognize that the important contributions to
the understanding of crystal plasticity through P. Haasen
(one of the last pupils of R. Becker) and his school prin-
cipally concern thermally activated and time-dependent pro-
cesses (compare his widely-known book, Reference 29).
Similarly, Ali S. Argon, a pupil and long-time co-worker of
E. Orowan, is editor and/or co-author of comprehensive
books on thermomechanical behavior and on the kinetics
of slip. 3~
Also in England the rate and thermal aspects of plastic
deformation received much emphasis, in combination with
the long-range stress concept, doubtless stimulated by Mott,
as reflected in the later theories of Mott and Hirsch. We may
also mention the considerations on the role of "forest"
dislocations and their cutting through thermally activated
processes in the course of plastic deformation to which
Basinski, in particular, has given much attention (e.g.,
References 32, 33). In fact, in their recent survey article
"Plastic Deformation and Work Hardening", 34 S.J. and
Z. S. Basinski designate the thermally activated and the not
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985--2093
thermally activated components of the yield stress ~'cotand
'/'mot, respectively, in clear allusion to Mott and Cottrell.
Besides fundamentally important work on the magnitude of
the temperature-dependent part of the flow stress, about
which more will be said later, Cottrell discovered, of course,
"Cottrell locking" of dislocations, the importance of which
can hardly be overestimated. The almost simultaneous dis-
covery of "Nabarro locking" of dislocations 35 is much less
known but can be another important contribution to the
thermally activated part of the flow stress.
Actually, we may recognize the heritage of the dynamical
interpretation also whenever we find, in connection with
problems of workhardening or fracture, the formula
"y = pmbv [10]
as a primary input, where pm designates the mobile disloca-
tion density and v their average velocity. That is a relation-
ship straight out of the dynamical concept of deformation.
Alas, G. I. Taylor left the field of plastic deformation very
soon after developing his famous theory. From the historical
perspective this explains why his insight of the importance
of stable dislocation arrays of low energy within which the
interactions of neighboring dislocations determine the fur-
ther flow stress, has not been propagated in any powerful
tradition. Eventually this is liable to be recognized as a
regrettable gap since present best understanding indicates
that in this direction one may find the cause of about 90 pct
of true workhardening. There is no doubt that also thermally
activated processes in the tradition of Becker/Orowan are
very important in a number of areas, foremost among them
creep, age-hardening, and reloading effects. However, as
will become clear in the next section, for excellent reasons
one may be convinced that they play not much of a role in
low-temperature workhardening proper.
C. An Early Test of the Orowan/Becker Formula
All of the early theoretical work discussed so far and until
about 1946 was pursued without the benefit of any realistic
test of Becker's formula. It had been established beyond
reasonable doubt 8'~~that back-creep after unloading of de-
formed samples, as well as forward creep directly after
loading, was thermally activated. However, the supposi-
tion that the forward creep accounted for all of the plastic
deformation, which was implicitly assumed in all of the
"dynamic" interpretations, had not been tested. This was
finally done under G. Masing. 24
The many measurements in that investigation showed that
creep effects in the vicinity of room temperature in pre-
viously workhardened copper wires occurred already much
below the macroscopic yield point. They were confidently
interpreted as due to plastic deformation triggered when the
applied stress raised remnant internal stresses in small vol-
ume elements to near the yield stress of the as-workhardened
material. At any rate, this type of creep was limited to very
low strains. Even though it continued seemingly indefi-
nitely, the strain rates decreased rather fast so that it never
was observed to amount to more than one-half of the elastic
strain and more typically to ten or twenty percent thereof.
The back creep after unloading (the so-called "elastic
aftereffect") certainly undid a large portion of the previous
forward creep, to the point that the most reasonable ex-
pectation was that it would completely restore the initial
2094--VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985
condition given sufficiently long waiting times. This ex-
pectation was ever the more bolstered by the fact that a short
annealing at about 100 ~ would restore the initial condi-
tion after such post-creep experiments again and again
and again.
In annealed wires, by contrast, the applied stress had to
be raised relatively much closer to the macroscopic yield
stress before any observable creep occurred, and in that case
the creep was preceded by a virtually instantaneous plastic
deformation. The magnitude of this non-creep plastic de-
formation rose rapidly with the applied stress, to become
much larger than either the elastic deformation or the subse-
quent after-creep strain as the macroscopic yield stress was
approached or exceeded. Altogether it clearly had an en-
tirely different physical origin, since it was not obviously
temperature dependent and also was not removed through
back-creep.
Those measurements on copper wires would have been
less convincing if they had not almost seamlessly fitted
into excellent earlier work by E.N. da C. Andrade 36 and
M. Kornfeld, 37 done on a wide range of materials and tem-
peratures, and including much higher stresses and strains
than used in Reference 24. Now that through a mass of
low-temperaure creep curves and a consistent web of deter-
minations of zcnt and V as functions of stress and material
the non-creep plastic deformation had been unambiguously
distinguished from the thermally activated part, and its typi-
cally much greater magnitude been established without rea-
sonable doubt, low-temperature creep effects had been
shown to be a minor byproduct of macroscopic plastic defor-
mation, an insight with which nowadays few would quarrel
but which at the time was unexpected by theoreticians.
Also the theoretical interpretation of these results 24 ap-
pears now to be as true as then, as follows. In the absence
of recrystallization or recovery, a load application near or
above the previously highest applied stress gives rise to a
very rapid formation of many dislocations which similarly
rapidly migrate toward equilibrium positions, thus causing
macroscopic plastic deformation. In line with Taylor's
theory, the dislocation density in the equilibrium array was
accepted to be proportional to the square of the applied
stress (Eq. [9]). The after-creep which often follows this
non-creep deformation is due to minor rearrangements of the
thusly established dislocation configuration, as the dis-
locations pass obstacles on the glide plane at which they had
been marginally trapped. It is propelled by the applied stress
in conjunction with the mutual repulsion of neighboring
dislocations and possible internal stresses, and is aided by
thermal activation but without benefit of large notch effects.
Possible obstacles could be mosaic block walls and dis-
locations intersecting the glide plane, to which with the
wisdom of hindsight we would nowadays add the resolution
of impediments due to point defects.
Thus the considerations of Becker/Orowan regarding the
thermal activation of the elementary glide processes were
combined with the Taylor concept of dislocation arrays in
equilibrium with the applied stress, through expanding on
the ideas of W.G. and J.M. Burgers, and Kochend~Srfer/
Dehlinger. The price of the unification was, firstly, dis-
missing the hypothesis that the formation of dislocations is
thermally activated and, secondly, abandoning the hypothe-
sis of the importance of local notch effects. Rather, from the
described test of Becker's formula24it was deduced that both
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
of these hypotheses are in conflict with experimental evi-
dence. Instead, the experiments seemed clearly to indicate
that dislocation arrays in equilibrium with the applied stress
form practically instantaneously, emitted from favored but
very plentiful locations which are the sources of sequences
of similar dislocations until the back-stress of the already
emitted dislocations stops their operation, while transient
creep and recovery are caused by minor readjustments in the
positions of the dislocations or the removal of some from
their respective segments of the glide plane.
D. Elastic Aftereffect and Recovery
The outlined dislocation model of plastic deformation,
albeit so far lacking any detailed workhardening features,
could be directly used for the quantitative interpretation of
two effects, namely, elastic aftereffect and recovery. To a
first approximation the time law of both of these (unlike the
already discussed forward creep at constant load which ap-
proximately follows a power law with variable exponents) is
simply logarithmic, i.e.,
e =B -A Int. [11]
In fact, this logarithmic law had been known for several
aftereffects, including also the dielectric and magnetic after-
effect for many years, and in the course of time a number of
very important physicists had made theories to account for
it. 3s-42 These generally assumed that the logarithmic time
law is due to the cooperative action of many volume ele-
ments acting with some other time law, e.g., the radioactive
decay law, but with different time constants. However, the
already discussed observations on the forward-creep behav-
ior had made it clear that this could not be the answer and
suggested a different solution, namely, that under the action
of local back-stresses, thermally activated creep takes place
on unloading and thereby decreases the local backstress.
Consequently, the activation energy of the back creep must
decrease linearly with the momentary strain, i.e.,
k = - K e -(v~ [12]
which on integration yields
e = (Uo/a) - (kr/a)ln(aK//~T) - ( l e T ~ a ) l n ( t + to)
= B -A ln(t + to) [13a]
with
to = (kT/otK)e (v~176 [13b]
The above t h e o r y 43 explained not only the elastic after-
effect, but also the dielectric after-effect and presumably all
other after-effects which progress according to a logarithmic
time law (indeed it appears to be the recognized theory for
this time law to this day): It was specifically found to be in
fine agreement with measurements on the recovery of alumi-
num wires which had just then been completed, z5 Therewith
it was felt that substantial progress had been made in the
understanding of plastic deformation: Sequences of dis-
locations, preponderantly of edge type, were emitted from
multitudes of easily activated sources, and would move
rapidly along their respective glide planes until blocked by
some obstacle. Subsequent dislocations from the same
source would aid the leading dislocations to overcome those
obstacles on account of the mutual repulsion within any one
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
sequence, either to move on to the next obstacle or, even-
tually, to be completely removed from the material, i.e., to
be "dissolved" at boundaries or through mutual annihila-
tion with dislocations of opposite sign. Thermal activation
could assist in the penetration of obstacles as well as
in mutual annihilation, but played no signficant role in
either dislocation formation, or motion along unobstructed
glide planes.
II. STAGES IN T H E E V O L U T I O N OF
THE THEORY OF WORKHARDENING
A. Dislocation Formation through Reflection or through
Continuous Sources?
International scientific cooperation with Germany was
reestablished in the area of materials science in 1948, and
particularly memorable in this regard is the participation of
E R. N. Nabarro in the September 1948 annual meeting of
the German Metallurgical Society in Stuttgart, the first for-
eign visitor at such a meeting since 1939. His and N. E
Mott's papers, as individual authors and in cooperation, had
by then already begun to become available also in Germany,
and the decisive impact of those papers on the theory of
plastic properties through a better understanding of dis-
locations was evident to all who read them. Thus Mott and
Nabarro had revolutionized the understanding of alloy hard-
ening through the fundamental thought that internal stresses
about foreign atoms and precipitates would locally counter-
act the applied stress and thereby hinder the motion of dis-
locations. 27'44Further, Mott 28 had considered metal creep in
terms of the thermally activated movement of dislocations
against local counteracting internal stresses, apparently
based on a then still unpublished paper by Orowan, 45 thus
further strengthening the tradition of Becker/Orowan.
After the 1948 conference in Stuttgart, Nabarro sum-
marized the research that had been done in Great Britain
since the outbreak of WW II for publication in German. 46
Consequently, the mutual knowledge of research in disloca-
tion theory and mechanical properties became much greater
between Germany and England than between Germany and
other countries, and in particular the United States. This led
to a somewhat regrettable initial neglect of the very fine
work that had since been done in the United States. Note-
worthy in particular would have been the excellent summary
of the "Theory of Plastic Properties" by E Seitz and T. A.
Read 47 and the theoretical discovery of dislocation image
forces at surfaces through J. S. Koehler. 48 However, it ap-
pears that no contributions to workhardening theory were
made by these or other U.S. authors which ought to be
included in this brief survey. It may be added for the sake
of interest; though, that by far not all researchers subscribed
to the dislocation concept at that time. After all, dislocations
were then and for a few more years a hypothetical model for
which there was no experimental evidence. Thus in 1948/9
Maddin, Mathewson, and Hibbard discovered c r o s s slip 49'50
without discussing it in terms of dislocations, for the reason
that Mathewson did not believe in their existence.
Soon after the Stuttgart Conference, N. E Mott invited
this writer for a period of research in Bristol on the sug-
gestion of F. R. N. Nabarro. This was the opportunity of a
lifetime since Mott had assembled a most powerful group of
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1 9 8 5 - - 2 0 9 5
researchers in the area of dislocations, the most important of
whom in the area of dislocation theory, besides Nabarro,
were W. K. Burton, N. Cabrera, J. D. Eshelby, E C. Frank,
J.W. Mitchell, and J. H. van der Merwe.
Now the discussed experimental results and the theory
developed therefrom24'25'43were subjected to much scrutiny
and not a few heated discussions, since they ran counter
to the opinions then prevailing in Bristol, to wit, that
(i) hardening resulted from a depletion of easily mobile
dislocations, 44'46'51 (ii) the resistance against glide resulted
from somewhat diffuse internal stresses rather than from
well-defined obstacles, 44'46 and (iii) that there was no pos-
sibility for the continuous generation of dislocations
from sources but that dislocation multiplication proceeded
through the reflection of very fast dislocations on account of
their kinetic energy. 52
Holding out against majority opinion, a paper on the
discussed model of crystal strength was prepared in 1949
and after some delays, pending insertion of references to
the prevailing consensus in Bristol, appeared in print. 53
Alas, this writer failed to find the solution to the riddle
how dislocations could be made continuously from plenti-
ful sources at moderate or low stresses in spite of their
high elastic energy, many, many hours of searching not-
withstanding. The reason was that only two-dimensional
motions were contemplated. Expanding the vision to three-
dimensional dislocations proved to be as difficult as initially
the visualization of screw and planar curved dislocations had
been. This breakthrough in insight was achieved by Frank
and Read soon thereafter. 54
B. Abandoning the Hypothesis of Workhardening through
Interacting Pile- Ups
However successful in many respects the discussed theo-
retical model 53appeared to be, especially after the discovery
of the Frank-Read source had removed the major objection
to it, the hypothesis that interacting dislocation pile-ups
cause workhardening had soon to be abandoned. The reason
was that it proved to be impossible to construct any stable
three-dimensional arrangement of mutually interacting pile-
ups. It is, of course, simple enough to visualize pile-ups
behind planar obstacles, and such have since been observed
often, beginning with Jacquet, 5s Bilby and Entwistle, 56 and
Gilman; 57 and Meakin and Wilsdorf s8 were the first to show
that the dislqcation spacings in them obey elastic theory. 59'6~
However, a mathematical analysis by van der Merwe 61
proved convincingly that when pile-ups of opposite sign
encounter each other on parallel slip planes they do not
simply block each other's path but reform into sequences of
dislocation dipoles.
In fact, dislocation etch patterns to show this conversion
of initial pile-ups into sequences of parallel dipoles, indeed
structures which on account of densely spaced parallel di-
poles resemble Taylor lattices, are plentifully observable,
especially in fcc low-stacking fault energy alloys. With this,
then, this writer arrived at the abiding conviction that it was
hopeless to try to base a workhardening theory on dis-
location pile-ups. They might form in the early stages of
straining when dislocation density was low, or at higher
dislocation densities there might be long-range stresses of
dislocations piled up against grain boundaries, for example,
and these could give rise to some hardening. However, a
2 0 9 6 - - V O L U M E 16A, DECEMBER 1985
strong Bauschinger effect would be associated with any
hardening due to the long-range stresses of pile-ups, and this
is not observed at all in single crystals, and not by far to the
expected degree in polycrystals, either. Moreover, there
would be little merit in invoking dislocation theory in situa-
tions in which pile-up type stresses arise, such as through
grain boundaries or twins or large precipitates, since the
hardening in those cases is more directly understood through
compatibility stresses on account of hardness variations,
either real or effected through orientation differences. As a
result of these arguments she did not participate in theo-
retical discussions on workhardening for a number of years,
while M o t t 62'63'64 and Seeger and c o - w o r k e r s 65'66'67 proposed
pile-up theories of workhardening. It may be added that
subsequently also Hirsch 68'69 and Hirsch and Mitchell 7~
added to the workhardening theory due to pile-ups, refining
the theoretical considerations of Mott. 62'63'64
True, according to the concept of Mott and Hirsch, jogs
and nonprimary dislocations would stabilize the pile-ups,
and it is possible that even now some of the present readers
may still believe that this solves the problem. However,
dislocations are the centers of intense internal stress fields
and at the same time are mobile under stresses. Therefore
they mutually screen each other's stress fields, much as
electrons screen each other's and the positive ions' electrical
fields so that as a result the interior of metals is virtually free
of electrical fields at all times. Equivalently, dislocations
arrange such that along the whole length of every dislocation
line the resolved shear stress for that dislocation cannot
exceed the local frictional stress.
Anyone trying to contribute to the theory of work-
hardening should keep the above facts in mind, together
with the further point that the strength of a crystal is deter-
mined by the most readily moveable dislocations, not by the
most firmly locked. Thus we may repeat what was briefly
stated already in section I-B in regard to hardening through
internal stresses: for every volume element in which the
internal stress opposes the applied stress, there is one in
which the internal stress aids the applied stress. As a con-
sequence, long-range internal stresses, apart from what has
already been explained in connection with compatibility
stresses, soften materials and do not contribute to true work-
hardening, and in this much the long-range stresses of pile-
ups are no different. And as to jogs, these give rise to a much
more strongly temperature-dependent flow stress than is
observed.
Short-range stresses, by contrast, can cause true strength-
ening because they enforce local variations in dislocation
curvature, as had been recognized by Mott and Nabarro 27 in
their theory of alloy hardening. The critical difference in the
effect of internal stresses on dislocations, then, is whether
their average range is substantially larger than the average
dislocation link length, in which case they act like long-
range stresses, or smaller so as to impede the movement of
individual dislocation link lengths as "short-range" stresses.
The concept of pile-up stabilization through nonprimary,
i.e., "forest" dislocations, is subject to further criticism as
follows: why should forest dislocations be generated in re-
sponse to the long-range pile-up stresses, rather than primary
dislocations of opposite sign and thereby the pile-up be
annihilated or dipoles be formed as shown in Reference 61?
The applied stress is highest on the primary system in any
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
event and the long-range pile-up stresses, which as ex-
plained can as much aid dislocation formation and motion as
hinder, provide stronger resolved shear stresses on the pri-
mary system than on any other. 72
We shall therefore say no more of pile-up theories of
workhardening: To this writer it has seemed evident ever
since the already quoted analysis 61 that the solution to the
workhardening problem cannot possibly lie in this direction,
since parallel pile-ups of opposite sign are unstable against
resolution into dipoles. And, we may add, subsequent direct
observations on dislocations have done nothing to further
the cause of pile-up theories, but rather have confirmed
Reference 61.
C. Abandoning Point Defects as a Possible Cause of
Workhardening
In 1956 the direct observation of dislocations in trans-
mission electron microscopy was discovered by Bollmann 73
and by Hirsch, Home, and Whelan, TM after Heidenreich75
had been the first to examine thinned metal samples, albeit
overlooking the dislocations. This oversight was most un-
derstandable because at that time there appeared to be no
reason why dislocations should cause any contrast changes
in the electron microscope at all. Even so, there already
existed various methods for the observation of dislocations.
Thus Amelinckx, Bethge, Dekeyser, Forty, Gevers, Griffin,
Verma, and Votava had made numerous studies of growth
steps on crystal surfaces which centered on dislocations,
thereby confirming and elaborating the theoretical predic-
tions by Frank 76 and Burton, Cabrera and Frank 77 regarding
crystal growth. This story is recorded in detail in the books
by Verma TM and Amelickx. 79
Another triumph of dislocation theory had previ-
ously come when Hedges and Mitchell 8~ had discovered
"decorated" dislocations in transparent crystals. Further, the
intersections of dislocations with free surfaces had been
made visible through selective etching by Jacquet, Wyon,
and Lacombe; Hibbard and Dunn; and Vogel et al.; and
H. G. F. Wilsdorf had been able to decorate dislocations in
metals with precipitates and thus observe segments thereof
in the electron microscope (see Reference 79 for details).
But none of the preceding techniques had remotely as much
impact as the direct observation of dislocations in thin films.
Suddenly dislocations were no longer somewhat abstract
entities, whose cold tracks or lifeless corpses could labori-
ously be made visible, but they were vividly present in
metals, in large numbers, moving in front of the in-
vestigators' eyes. The superb subsequent theoretical inter-
pretation of the dislocation images, largely through Hirsch
and co-workers as recorded in their book, 81 greatly added to
the usefulness of the method, including the ability to deter-
mine the Burgers vectors of the dislocations.
Initially, transmission electron microscopy of dis-
locations did not seem to yield many surprises. They were
seen to be so-to-speak well behaved, threading the thin films
as short segments in orderly sequences, or presenting them-
selves in long smooth lines parallel to the film surfaces.
However, the short straight dislocation pieces threading the
foils were shown to result from rearrangements on account
of the strong image forces of the foil surfaces, and the long
lines parallel to the foils formed only when foils with surface
layers were strained, and often were artifacts due to careless
METALLURGICALTRANSACTIONS A
handling of the foils. 82'83 Typically, the dislocations within
lightly deformed metals instead turned out to be profusely
kinked and branched, so that they looked almost like cotton-
wool. Indeed the word "cottonwool structure" was quite
widely used for some years, apparently coined by Hirsch.
We now know that initially the foils were much too thin
to reveal the true dislocation arrangements on a larger scale,
since with the then available microscopes only foils in the
range of 1000 ~ thickness yielded adequate light intensity
on the screens. In fact, as all of the present readers will
know, one looked at only small samplings in a dislocation
cell structure of generally much larger scale.
When this was discovered, interest in the origin of the
"cottonwool" effect waned, but it deserves reexamination
since it is still not fullly understood. Almost certainly the
original suggestion s3 that it is caused by interactions be-
tween dislocations and point defects, probably mostly lattice
vacancies, in a complex process dubbed "mushrooming" is
correct (compare also References 84 through 88). The dis-
location locking which atttends such kinking is, however,
not large, but only on the order of quench hardening. This
was first investigated by Maddin and Cottrell s9 and by
Kimura and Maddin (Reference 90; see also References
84, 91, and 92, among others).
On the basis of these investigations plus the excellent
work by Koehler, Seitz, and Bauerle on the changes in
electrical resistivity accompanying quenching, 93'94 the gen-
eration of quench loops could be predicted 9s'96 and the mea-
surements fully interpreted, 97 before quench loops were
experimentally observed. It should be added, however, that
by a remarkable feat of theoretical foresight Seitz 98had sug-
gested as early as 1950 that in the course of ordinary cooling
thermal vacancies would condense into prismatic dis-
location loops, and these would be an important source of
dislocations in real crystals, which indeed is true. Sub-
sequently, research into quenched-in vacancies blossomed
widely with much excellent work done, largely summarized
in Reference 99, even before it became apparent how vitally
important an understading of the interactions between dis-
locations and point defects would become in connection
with radiation damage.
It has been indicated already that quench hardening, and
thus also point defect hardening, is modest (in the order of
30 MPa or less). But that is not the only reason why point
defect hardening must be ruled out as a significant con-
tribution to workhardening. More importantly, dislocations
sweep out excess point defects and very small vacancy clus-
ters that may be present initially. 100.10~This is accompanied
by little or no hardening, while the vacancies are converted
into more stable forms. Indeed, "mushrooming ''83'84 may
best be understood as the plating out of supersaturated va-
.......................................
A little known but very significant investigation has
shed additional light on the mechanisms of point defect
hardening. ~~ In this, eleven similar 99.999 pct Cu single
crystals were prestressed (and thus workhardened) to differ-
ent levels and then neutron irradiated, all to the same dose,
thereby superimposing point defect hardening on the already
existing workhardening. Thereafter the yield stress of the
eleven crystals was determined. Off-hand one might have
expected a uniform increase in the flow stress of all samples.
However, the point defect hardening was found to be much
stronger for initially softer than harder crystals, namely,
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985--2097
about 15 MPa at the lowest prestress of 1.2 MPa, and only
about 0.1 MPa at 50 MPa prestress. Most gratifyingly, this
result could be readily, and quantitatively, explained
through the "meshlength" theory of workhardening, to be
discussed in detail later.
Finally, as has already been mentioned, on account of
their low activation energy of motion and formation, all
mechanisms involving vacancies have a strong temperature
dependence, whereas the major part of workhardening, at
least in stage II, depends on temperature only as the elastic
modulus. That latter important insight is due to Seeger and
co-workers, 65 as also the division of the workhardening
curve into three parts, namely, stages I, II, and III (compare
also the encyclopaedic discussion of crystal plasticity by
Seeger in Reference 67).
D. Abandoning "Jog-Dragging" and "Forest-Cutting" as
Possible Causes of Workhardening
In the course of straining, glide dislocations must cer-
tainly intersect many dislocations threading the glide plane.
That this should add to the flow stress (on account of the
stress fields of dislocations) and that therefore such dis-
location intersections represent obstacles to glide, was al-
ready proposed in Reference 24, but the thought is very
obvious and may well be older yet. What was not initially
obvious is that the cutting as well as intersected dislocations
acquire jogs which cannot simply be removed through glide.
Mort, who was the first to consider the effect of jogs on
mechanical properties, 1~ credits Thornton Read with the
discovery that jogs on screw dislocations leave either rows
of vacancies or interstitials behind, depending on the direc-
tion of the jog relative to the dislocation motion (compare
the treatment of jogs in the books by Read TM and Cottrell~~
Mott 1~ considered the accumulation of jogs, and hence the
formation of large jogs and the possible creation of prismatic
loops through these, by repeated intersections of screw dis-
locations by loops emitted from Frank-Read sources. He
realized that the hardening effect would be less for vacancy
than interstitial jogs, and considered the associated tem-
perature dependence of the resultant drag.
In his subsequent pile-up theory 62'63'64Mott retained many
of those early considerations and further elaborated them.
However, in recognition of the strong temperature de-
pendence of jog drag, the function of jogs in the theories of
Mott and Hirsch is principally to stabilize dislocation pile-
ups and the surrounding secondary dislocations. Indeed,
dislocation jogs cannot account for workhardening, except
for some of the minor hardening in Stage I.
A different question is whether the intersecting of"forest"
dislocations so as to form junctions can account for the
flow stress of crystals, plus whatever temperature-depen-
dent flow stress contributions there may be from jogs, etc.
That is the hypothesis championed by Basinski (e.g., Ref-
erences 32, 33); but as phrased above, the question cannot
be properly answered. Namely, it seems clear that the non-
primary dislocations at issue, to which the primary dis-
locations are linked through nodes, are misnamed if one
adheres to the initial meaning of the term "forest dis-
locations", namely, that of preexisting dislocations. Rather,
the dislocations at issue are not preexisting but manifestly
increase in rough proportion with the primary dislocations,
and they are not intersected by the primary dislocations in
2098--VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985
the course of their glide motions. In this sense, then, the
answer is "no."
On the other hand, in any three-dimensional network in
which primary and other dislocations are interconnected, the
average link length of the primary dislocations is evidently
intimately correlated with the length and number of non-
primary links. Therefore, to the extent that primary dis-
location links must bow out beyond their critical radius in
order to permit further glide, and to the extent that this
requires the Frank-Read stress plus the frictional stress on
the dislocations from all other sources, one will find the
momentary flow stress to be excellently well explained
through measurements on the "forest" dislocations. This,
however, constitutes proof of the "mesh-length" theory of
workhardening, ~~ especially in view of the fact that
Basinski has never offered any theory of workhardening
himself, but has limited himself to an explanation of
the magnitude of the flow stress on the primary and on
latent glide systems. Thus, the so-called "forest" dislocations
are not the (or a) cause of workhardening but they are a
phenomenon involved in it.
E. Other Theoretical Concepts
The number of publications in the field of workhardening
is so large that it is impossible to make reference to all
relevant papers. Already in Seeger's survey of 195867 there
are several hundred references, and the literature has, of
course, greatly expanded since then. In the present paper we
are restricting our attention to the theory of workhardening,
and this with particular reference to the basic case of the
three-stage workhardening curve in which stage II, in par-
ticular, is nearly straight and the flow stress in it is composed
of two parts, named rs and ~-~ in accordance with the usage
by Seeger. Moreover, we focus on the historical evolution of
workhardening theory. In this context, a number of papers
ought still to be mentioned besides those referenced already,
as follows.
A very early theory of workhardening, apparently stimu-
lated by that of Mott, J~ was proposed by J. S. Koehler ~4
who distinguished between "interaction hardening" and
"source hardening". This proved to be a very useful con-
cept. Next, in 1952/3 Haasen and Leibfried made a theory
of the orientation dependence of workhardening of alumi-
num, based on the concept that always the most highly
stressed nonprimary glide systems would interfere with pri-
mary glide. This was based on a pile-up model. ~15,1~6These
authors also made creep tests at very small strains, 1~7 pre-
sumably as a final effort to clarify the applicability of
Eq. [1]. In this work, on A1 single crystals, the logarithmic
time law (Eq. [13]) was observed transiently also in forward
creep. Unaccountably, though, no theoretical interpretation
was offered nor any mention made of References 24,
25, and 43 even though the later results were entirely
consistent with these and with the model that had been
developed therein.
Many important experimental contributions to work-
hardening have been made by Haasen and co-workers.
Among these one may list an excellent study of the stress-
strain behavior of nickel, H8 the insight that diamond-type
crystals exhibit much the same workhardening behavior as
fcc metals,~J9 and that the dislocation density (in NaC1) rises
as the square of the resolved shear stress, t2~thus for the first
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
time verifying Eq. [9] experimentally. Haasen further added
to Seeger's theory the feature that the onset of stage III can,
in the framework of that theory, be employed to determine
the stacking fault energy.~18
The orientation dependence of Stage I in pure single
crystals was first systematically investigated by Liicke and
Lange. 121 Another very important early scientist in the area
of crystal plasticity was J. Friedel. He contributed numerous
ideas and dislocation mechanisms which may be found in
his book. 122 Albeit, the distinction between mathematical
theory, fact, or conjecture, as the case might be, has not
always been made clear enough in that book. Further,
Friedel ~23 and Friedel and Saada TM made contributions to
workhardening behavior which were based on specific dis-
location models. However, it seemed clear even then that
workhardening was too wide-spread a phenomenon with
only a few basic features, and that these were independent
of specifics of the material tested (e.g., for the case of
technological metals shown by McGregor and Welch125), as
if that approach could succeed.
Of very great basic importance has remained to be the
contribution of Cottrell and Stokes126 of showing that Ts and
rc tend to be proportional to each other with much the same
proportionality constant in stages II and III. This is the
so-called Cottrell-Stokes law. It places severe restrictions on
the range of theoretical workhardening models. Generally,
the Cottrell-Stokes ratio, namely ~s/Zc, is small, say, in the
order of 10 pct. Slight deviations from the law were ob-
served in Stage I and were related to impurity level. 32 How-
ever, Evans and Flanagan ~z7'128 found significant positive
deviations with solute additions that decreased with de-
formation but persisted well into Stage II, to a degree
dependent on solute content. This has been shown to
be true for various solutes. 128'129 Also, at higher tempera-
tures of deformation, when the creep range is approached,
this ratio rises, however, as was shown by Hirsch and
Warrington. 130Lastly, the concept of "dislocation locks" has
proved to be of great importance in the theory. It began with
a paper by Lomer TM pointing out that parallel dislocations on
intersecting glide systems in fcc crystals could react with
each other to form immobile dislocations, in that the new
Burgers vector together with the dislocation line direction
would specify a (100) instead of a (111) plane as glide plane.
Cottrell recognized that the reaction considered by Lomer
was not complete, and that the dislocation would become
truly sessile only through the extension via stacking fault
ribbons on both of the participating glide planes. 132
Such dislocation barriers, called Lomer-Cottrell locks,
have been profusely observed in deformed fcc metals with
low stacking fault energies, and not unnaturally they were
for some time widely regarded to be an important ingredient
in workhardening. Only recently has their true function
become clear, however. H3'~33 It is comparable to that of
the "forest" dislocations already discussed.
F. Controversies
The opinion that workhardening is poorly understood
theoretically is unhappily widespread. Thus Basinski and
Basinski, in their 1979 survey article 34requote with approval
Cottrell's 1953 words that workhardening "was the first
problem to be attempted by the dislocation theory of slip and
may well prove to be the last to be solved." In a similar vein,
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
in the 1966 exposition of his theory TM Seeger showed a
figure to indicate that since about 1958 progress in under-
standing crystal plasticity had been quite erratic. This gave
occasion for T.E. Mitchell to remark in the discussion
(p. 61 of Reference 134) that he thought the curve in that
figure "would drop very steeply after your talk"; and indeed
the acceptability of publicly claiming lack of progress in the
theoretical understanding of workhardening may have had
its origin right there.
A little later in their introduction the authors of Ref-
erence 34 state: "There has been no shortage of proposed
explanations for workhardening. Cottrell, in his 1953
book l~ examines about ten models... Almost every con-
ceivable dislocation configuration has been considered as
the basis for a model. Many of these, and the resulting
theories, have been reviewed critically by Nabarro et al. 32
Three models for stage II seem to have survived at the
expense of the others, with no general agreement as to
which, if any, is compatible with all experimental data."
They then proceed to outline and discuss two, and the reader
is left in the dark which the third one might be. The first two
models are pile-ups and forest cutting, respectively, and on
the basis of the criticisms already given it is clear that they
are indeed unsatisfactory. The missing third model is the
meshlength theory.
The failure to treat adequately all of the relevant papers in
a review, as indicated, has regrettably not been an isolated
phenomenon. In fact, prolonged controversy and the in-
trusion of political considerations which this has bred, fo-
cused in Europe, has been the bane of workhardening theory
and must be held responsible for the sluggish progress
made. In this climate the nonspecialist has understandably
turned away in bewilderment, and many an experimentalist
did not hesitate to propose his own novel theory to explain
his own particular data, unaware of the wealth of knowledge
available and the stringent boundary conditions to which any
new theory must conform.
Recognizing the paralyzing effect which the controversy
had already had twenty years ago, Hirth and Weertman or-
ganized a conference on workhardening theory in Chicago,
November 1966, endeavoring to bring together all of the
major contestants so that rational debate could be brought to
bear on identifying the most acceptable theory. The pre-
viously quoted summaries of their respective theories by
Friedel and Saada, TM Hirsch and Mitchell, 7~ Seeger,134 and
Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf 1~ are all contained in the conference
volume which resulted, t3s and it was here that the figure
regarding the erratic progress of theory was presented. Re-
grettably, Basinski, although invited, could not attend. This
writer is not aware of any substantial additions to the various
theories since the 1966 Chicago Conference, except those
regarding the meshlength theory. 1~ To this we shall
therefore turn in the next section, concentrating on the con-
tents of References 106 through 113.
The present restriction to the meshlength theory is not
meant to imply that, having ruled out two classes of theo-
ries, there are no other worthwhile or important aspects of
workhardening theory left, only that these are outside of the
particular area of concern here, namely, temperature-
independent, three stage workhardening interpreted in terms
of dislocations. For example, Kocks, Argon, and Ashby ~36
have extensively considered thermally activated processes
in plastic deformation, and Kocks, Chen, Rigney, and
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985--2099
Schaefer 137 have contributed a very worthwhile paper on
Stage III to the 1966 Chicago Conference. ~35Besides, there
is a great volume of excellent theory on the deformation
of polycrystals and texture formation (partly treated in
Reference 136 also) which has been reviewed recently
by Sevillano, van Houtte, and Aernoudt. ~38The latter does
not involve dislocation mechanisms to any major extent,
however.
I I I . P R E S E N T STATE OF T H E O R E T I C A L
UNDERSTANDING OF WORKHARDENING
A. The Momentary Flow Stress
The momentary flow (or yield) stress of crystals, accord-
ing to the meshlength theory, equals
'r = r0 + const Gb/l = ~o + aGbX/pP, [14]
where T0 is the friction stress on the dislocations which is
considered to be due to all causes except interactions with
the elastic stress fields of other dislocations. The term
aGb X/pp reflects the magnitude of the Frank-Read stress that
is necessary in order to bow out always the longest common
links in the networks of dislocations in the crystals. Namely,
since dislocations are mobile under stresses and, as indi-
cated already in an earlier section, will never be found
where the local resolved shear stress exceeds the friction
stress, z0, they will necessarily arrange into some fairly
regular structures. And in regular networks the average dis-
location link length must be inversely proportional to the
root of the dislocation density.
Equation [ 14] thus represents the stress which is necessary
to bow out representative dislocation links in the dislocation
structure of the crystal so as to effect plastic deformation.
The magnitude of the constant ~ is not immediately obvi-
ous, and indeed cannot be known unless one knows the
geometry of the networks. That geometry is determined by
the specific conditions of straining, crystal structure, and
other lattice defects. However, the dislocation networks will
always approach the lowest possible stored energy com-
patible with the dislocation mobility. After all, forces are
the result of energy gradients and always act so as to reduce
mechanical energy in favor of converting it into heat.
The experimental support for Eq. [ 14] under all imag-
inable circumstances is nowadays overwhelming, whereas
it was in conflict with available data when it was first
proposed. ,06
B. Stage H Workhardening
Even without knowing the geometry of the dislocation
structures (and at the time of Reference 106 they were still
believed to be three-dimensional of roughly constant den-
sity, much like a three-dimensional chicken wire) it is pos-
sible to derive stage II hardening from Eq. [ 14]. To this end
it is necessary to introduce the so-called "principle of
similitude" which says that once nature has selected a par-
ticular geometry, increasing stress will cause that structure
to remain essentially similar to itself but shrink in scale such
that l~ 1/~'. The reason for this is that the network must be
"stress-screened" in the sense already discussed. This re-
quires that at any arbitrary applied stress and at any arbitrary
2100--VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985
position along any dislocation line, the sum of all stresses
due to the dislocations just balance the applied stress,
plus/minus the friction stress which is normally negligible.
Therefore, once nature has so-to-speak invented the best
possible network to fulfill this condition, and we observe it
in a crystal, it is obvious that the same network but at half
the size will be stable under twice the stress, since the elastic
stresses of dislocations are inversely proportional to the
distance from the axis.
Consider, then, a network as described in a stress-free,
well-annealed crystal to which a stress is applied slowly.
Initially, the dislocation links will be straight, but as the
stress is applied they will bow out to different degrees ac-
cording to their different orientations, lengths, and Burgers
v e c t o r s - - f o r at least two different Burgers vectors will be
involved and generally three or more, and each of these with
two different senses, i.e., "positive" and "negative", or
"left-handed" and "right-handed".
Thus the selfstress of the curved dislocations on account
of their line tension will come into play and will counteract
the applied stress, until the most favorably oriented and
longest dislocation links bow out beyond their critical radius
and run off as glide dislocation loops. Those run-away glide
loops will intersect other dislocations in the network, and
will here and there form junctions, i.e., add links to the
network, until they come to rest and are themselves incorpo-
rated as links into the network. In that process nonprimary
dislocations will be formed, if for no other reason than that
the dislocations react with dislocations with nonparallel
Burgers vectors. Where they encounter dislocations of their
own glide system but with opposite direction of Burgers
vector, there also will be mutual annihilation.
Whatever the specific geometry and dislocation reactions
involved, however, it is clear that the average radius to
which a loop can expand (before it is merged into the dislo-
cation network, thereby contributing to the dislocation den-
sity and thus decreasing the average dislocation link length
and increasing the flow stress), i.e., its average free path,
must be some multiple of l, the momentary link length.
Similarly, also, the additional dislocation length which re-
suits from any one link expanding beyond its critical radius
as described must be a multiple of the link length. Without
these conditions the network could not obey similitude.
On the strength of these basic principles alone, without
invoking any particular dislocation structure, we may then
write for the average link length
l = m/X/pp [15]
where m is a numerical factor not far from unity. The shear
increment due to the emission of 6n. new dislocation links
will be
{~'YI1 = qbl 2 6nii [16]
with q another numerical constant, while the remnants of
these loops that are trapped and incorporated into the dis-
location network will add the dislocation density increment
~Pll----pl~nll = ( p / qbl ) ~')/I1 = ( p X/ pp/ qmb ) ~')/II
[17]
with p a third geometrical constant. Therefore, with Eqs.
[14] and [17] we obtain
(Or) = (O~'Op~ = t~Gp/2qm [18a]
II \ O p 3'y//II
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
or
0(_~_) = G/(2qm/ap) = G / K = 0Ii tlSb]
\oy/ II
i.e., the linear workhardening law which is characteristic for
stage II, with the workhardening coefficient On proportional
to the shear modulus.
Notice that thus stage II type hardening must be expected
under a very wide range of circumstances, provided only
that (i) the dislocations interact more with each other than
with any other defects, so that dislocation networks which
approach minimum energy among the trapped dislocations
are formed, and (ii) that the principle of similitude operates,
so that the numerical parameters m, p, and q remain un-
changed. And indeed it is necessary that theory show stage II
behavior to be dependent only on the most basic properties
of dislocations, as in the above derivation, since otherwise
its most widespread occurrence under a host of different
deformation conditions and for a very wide variety of mate-
rials could not be understood.
C. Stage III Workhardening and Curvature of Stage II
Stage II workhardening will continue as long as the prin-
ciple of similitude is obeyed. Sooner or later this will break
down, and another regime will begin. For a-brass type
alloys, that may be the break-through of dislocations on the
second system through networks of primary dislocations and
be observed as "overshooting". That is a rather rare phe-
nomenon, though, and more typically one observes the so-
called stage III, characterized by a gentle bending over of
the stress-strain curve i,,o a parabola that follows stage II
without break and with continuous slope. 136
In Reference 108, in which the meshlength theory was for
the first time rewritten in terms of a dislocation cell struc-
ture, it has been proposed that in this case similitude, and
hence stage II workhardening, terminates because the cells
cease to shrink in size. If so, the typical parabolic work-
hardening law of stage II1 results as follows: Let the mean
free dislocationpath be the average cell diameter, Lc. Then
Lc replaces X/ql in Eq. [16] and in the first part of Eq. [17],
and instead of Eq. [18] we obtain
[19a]
which by the use of Eq. [14] transforms to
d(--Z-i = (e~2G2bp)/[2N/-qq L c ( ~ ' - ~'0)] [19b]
\aT/ III
Integration then yields the parabolic law
- ~m = (~OVbp/4Lc~qq)X/-4V- 7o. [20]
Presumably, this is not the only way in which a parabolic
workhardening law can be obtained. However, the above
proposal was made in Reference 108 because it appeared to
be most logical and likely. It is symptomatic for the poor
interaction among different research groups in the area of
workhardening that the above suggestion of a more or less
constant cell size in stage III appears never to have been
thoroughly tested. This is a task that needs to be done
most urgently.
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
The merits of the outlined simple derivation of stage III
hardening include that it involves minimal assumptions,
again necessary because of the very widespread occurrence
of stage III type behavior. Besides, in Reference 108
the theory was refined by taking into consideration that
the Frank-Read stress is not simply inverse to the source
length, l~, as implied in Eq. [14] but is better repre-
sented 14~by
~~ = (Gb/2rrls) In(Is~b). [21]
The effect of the logarithmic term is to impart a curvature to
stage II. When this was first discovered, that aspect of the
meshlength theory was very worrisome because the belief
that stage II was truly linear was very widespread. However,
a search of the literature turned up a paper by Mader, Seeger,
and Leitz m in which the nonlinearity of stage II was dis-
cussed as a fact of experimental observation, and it was
suggested that actually stage II consisted of two linear parts.
The curve presented by these authors TM happened to fit ex-
actly among a group of workhardening curves which had al-
ready been computed and drafted on the basis of the theory.
The agreement between the experimental curve and the ones
calculated from the theory was excellent as will be seen
from Figure 8 of Reference 108. Evidently, then, stage II
is only approximately linear. Similarly, stage III is not
entirely parabolic but only nearly so.
Additionally, lOSthe meshlength theory was tested against
all other known major facts which a workhardening theory
must be expected to explain, and was found to be highly
successful in all respects. This included a simple explana-
tion for the Cottrell-Stokes law, and the rate of energy stor-
age in workhardening.
D. Extracting the Parameters in the Theory from
Micrographs and Comparing the Computed with
the Actual Workhardening Curve
Several geometrical parameters are required in the mesh-
length theory in order to describe the geometry of the dis-
location network and of the motion of the glide loops. In
deriving Eqs. [15] through [20] these were simply intro-
duced as the proportionality factors m, p, and q. For any
specific dislocation arrangement, however, the correspond-
ing parameters have their well-defined physical meanings
and they are measurable, at least in principle. Thus it is
possible to make a quantitative check of the meshlength
theory, given plentiful good micrographs of the dislocation
structures at different stresses together with the correspond-
ing stress-strain curve. Such became available for the first
time with the excellent micrographs and data by Langford
and Cohen 142 on extensively drawn 99.99 pct iron wire.
Very kindly, Langford and Cohen provided a consid-
erable number of large original micrographs. On these the
requisite measurements were made and the necessary pa-
rameters extracted after the theory had been cast into the
appropriate form for application to the specific orientation
and structure of the polycrystalline wire used. Thereafter
the workhardening curve was computed with the experi-
mentally determined parameters and compared with the
actual workhardening curve. This research is presented in
Reference 109.
V O L U M E 16A, D E C E M B E R 1985--2101
 The microstructures indicated the operation of stage II
behavior throughout the whole range of strains, from 22 pct
to 740 pct true strain. The theoretically computed curve re-
produced the shape of the entire experimental workharden-
ing curve to an accuracy within two percent or so, using
but one disposable parameter, namely, the equivalent of To
which cannot be extracted from the dislocation structure.
As it turned out, somewhat unexpectedly, the geometrical
parameters appeared only in one grouping (namely, using
the symbols in Reference 109, ~/nF) so that the work-
hardening curve is describable by just one compound pa-
rameter. From the micrographs this was determined at
1/(3.3 x 540) = 1/1780, while the best interpolation of
the workhardening curve required 1/(3.3 x 680) =
1/2240. This agreement was held to be within the limits of
accuracy of the measurements, including possible errors of
magnification, as well as neglecting the probable linear
increase of ~'0 with the flow stress in accord with the Cottrell-
Stokes law which cannot be determined from the dis-
location structure. Altogether, therefore, this study may be
regarded as a very stringent and successful test of the theory.
An interesting sequel further strengthened confidence in
the theory. Namely, initial indications had been that the
average angle of misorientation between the cells did not
change with straining, whereas the theory yields this as
rising nearly linearly with stress. Subsequent measure-
ments confirmed that the angle of misorientation does in-
deed rise about linearly with stress. A later repetition of
the experiments with drawn iron-titanium wires, with up to
3.16 pct Ti, 143 yielded very closely similar results in regard
to the micrographs and shape of the stress strain curves, as
well as quite similar values of 0H. However, considerably
higher values of r0 were apparent, and overall smaller cell
diameters. These findings are in excellent agreement with
expectations from the meshlength theory (see footnote on
p. 3174 of Reference 109). Besides confirming the basic
soundness of the theory, Reference 109 thus also gives
impressive evidence for the wide range of applicability
of it, i.e., not merely to single crystals of pure metals at
small to intermediate strains, but also to polycrystals and
alloys, and evidently including even quite extreme condi-
tions of straining.
E. Computer Calculations Identifying Cell Structures of
Minimum Stored Energy
The further evolution of the meshlength theory evidently
required that dislocation structures be identified which
under specified circumstances will minimize the stored dis-
location energy. Correspondingly this was the next task
undertaken. Namely, it is inherently unsatisfactory to make
so-to-speak post hoc theories in which the essential pro-
cesses must be inferred from the evidence after the fact,
rather than being able to make predictions. The challenge
thus was, and in a large measure remains to this day, to be
able to predict the geometry of the dislocation structures that
will be formed in any particular material under specified
conditions of straining.
As a first approach in this direction, M o o r e 144'145 and
Bassim 146 made computer calculations of the stresses of a
variety of dislocation arrangements, in an effort to find the
structure of minimum energy for a given total dislocation
2102--VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985
content. It may be added here that J. C. M. Li appears to
have been the first to make a mathematical study of dis-
location cells. 147
Mostly, three equal coplanar Burgers vectors at 120 deg
angles, i.e. as on (111) planes of fcc metals, were consid-
ered. The method used was to compute the magnitude of
different stress components, or on occasion the elastic en-
ergy density, due to plausible dislocation arrangements. The
results were displayed in the form of planar cuts through the
material in different positions and orientations, whereby
several ranges of magnitudes were distinguished by means
of overlaid symbols in the print-outs so as to generate fields
of varying darkness according to the intensity of the stress
component or strain energy density, as the case might be.
The major conclusions are as follows (using the nomen-
clature of Reference 148):
(1) Typically, energy minimization is most effective when
the dislocations assemble into low-energy boundaries.
(2) As a rule, the energy of arrays of dislocations with only
one Burgers vector, can be reduced by the addition of dis-
locations with other Burgers vectors. Generally, the energy
drops with increasing number of Burgers vector directions
involved, but the incremental energy advantage through di-
versification of Burgers vector directions decreases with
increasing number of directions. Almost uniformly, there-
fore, at least three Burgers vector orientations are expected
to be involved in a cell structure, with additions of fourth
and fifth Burgers vectors typically nonmajor. This, then, is
the origin of "forest dislocations" and explains their virtually
ubiquitous presence, together with the fact that in the later
stages of deformation "forest dislocations" tend to form in
proportion with the primary dislocation density, typically
outnumbering these two to one.
(3) Dislocation cells represent (a more or less perfect ap-
proach to) volume elements free of long-range stresses
which are rigidly rotated relative to the surrounding matrix
material.
(4) Isolated dislocation cells in a matrix (by geometry re-
sembling, say, pebbles in concrete) have a by far higher
energy than interconnected cells (i.e., reminiscent of a
three-dimensional mosaic). This, then, is the origin of the
"mosaic block structure" of old, which had been known
and observed for so long but whose reason of existence had
been unclear.
(5) The cell shape and arrangement of lowest energy that
could be found is a three-dimensional checkerboard pattern
of roughly rectangled cells with a common axis of misori-
entation but whose sense of rotation alternates left-right-left-
right. 146
While the first four conclusions could be readily ac-
cepted, the fifth was totally unexpected. It had been taken
for granted that cells would be roughly hexagonal and fit to-
gether like the cells in a honeycomb, so as to minimize the
area of cell walls. A search of the literature prompted by
the above result revealed some instances of rectangled cells,
though, which seemed to fit the prediction, and gradually
the incidence of published cell structures of the described
geometry has become quite common. Reference 110 con-
tains a summary of the research on minimum energy con-
figurations of dislocation arrays by means of numerical
model computations.
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
E Stage I Hardening
In the framework of the meshlength theory, stage I occurs
when the initial defect density is quite low and defects other
than dislocations provide the dominant obstacles at the onset
of deformation. In that case the first dislocations traverse
long free paths and do not initially inhibit each other's mo-
tions. This is, of course, possible only in single glide, and
for this reason stage I is not found in polycrystals, nor when
the initial orientation favors multiple glide.
Very low, or even negative workhardening (i.e., work-
softening) can occur also for either of two other reasons,
namely (i) when the first movements of dislocations ei-
ther provide mobile dislocations whereas the preexisting
population had been anchored in some way, e.g., through
Cottrell atmospheres, or (ii) when the passage of dis-
locations reduces the frictional stress on the glide plane,
e.g., by breaking through precipitates or sweeping up point
defect debris. Those latter two types of low initial work-
hardening are not true "stage I", though, and we are not
further concerned with them.
A recent refinement of the meshlength theory, 113based on
dislocation microscopy by N. Comins, and partly on a series
of papers by Jackson and co-workers, T M has shed new
light on stage I in fcc metals, as follows: The dislocations
begin as isolated pile-ups (e.g., as seen in Reference 58).
These reduce to sequences of dipoles in accordance with the
argument of Reference 61. The elastic stress of the resulting
rows of similar edge dislocations, whose sign alternates
from row to row (and which in fact constitute a Taylor
lattice 7) impose alternating tensile and compression stresses
on the slabs of material between them.
As the applied stress, and thus the density of the dipoles
defining those slabs, is increased, the said tensile and com-
pression stresses rise until, directly or via cross slip, they
trigger the operation of the same nonprimary glide systems
which would operate under those stresses in isolated slabs of
the same geometry. Once this occurs, the new nonprimary
dislocations react with the primary edge dislocations to form
dislocation networks including segments (or links) of pri-
mary dislocations and Lomer-Cottrell locks. This, then, ex-
plains the plentiful occurrence of Lomer-Cottrell locks in fcc
metals in early stage II.
By their nature, the new networks are tilt walls (of alter-
nating sign) whose axis of rotation lies in the glide plane,
normal to the glide direction. This, then, is the cause of the
very common and long-known lattice rotation which gives
rise to asterism and was first described by G. I. Taylor 153and
K. Yamaguchi. TM Note that together with interconnect-
ing dislocation walls, this is an example of the rectangular
cells with parallel rotation axis but alternating sense of ro-
tation m which had been predicted ~46 as yielding minimum
stored energy.
With the formation of the discussed dislocation cell
structure, stage I ends and stage II begins. The described
geometry had already been unraveled by Jackson and co-
workers. 149-52 Further, much earlier still, the nature of the
dislocation mats parallel to the glide plane which arise from
the interaction of the "forest" dislocations with the initial
dipoles, namely, as of tilt walls in the Taylor/Yamaguchi
orientation, had already been recognized by Moon and
Robinson,155 Essmann, 156Gassenmeier and Wilkens, 157 and
Pande and Hazzledine. ~5~ Also the presence of Lomer-
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
Cottrell locks in these boundaries was demonstrated in
References 156 through 58, and that they signal the onset of
stage II, albeit the connection to the meshlength theory and
the theory of dislocation cells was only made in Ref-
erences 113 and 133.
The further analysis of the discussed networks, 113making
use of Frank's formula for low-angle boundaries ~59 as cast
into the form of more readily handled vector diagrams,16~
yielded additional details of the dislocation net geometry
which permit quite detailed checks of the theory. Further-
more, a theoretical expression for rH, the stress at the onset
of stage II, was derived as a function of crystal orientation
(Eq. [24] of Reference 113). This latter relationship is in
fine qualitative accord with known observations but still
awaits quantitative comparison with experiment.
G. The Ratio of the Average Dislocation Cell Diameter to
the Average Dislocation Link Length
Two of the important geometrical parameters in the the-
ory can be dealt with readily. One of these is m of Eq. [ 15],
which may be directly computed once the dislocation struc-
ture is known. The other is the proportionality factor which
links the average dislocation link length, l, to the average
length of the momentarily active sources, ls, i.e.,
n = ls/l. [22]
From basic principle, this is expected 1~ to be near three, and
already in Reference 106 of 1962 it had been estimated as qr.
The micrographs of Langford and Cohen ~4zfinally permitted
an experimental determination. This yielded n = 3.3 (see
Reference 109).
Only two important parameters remain to be considered.
One of these is the parameter/3 which we met already as
part of the compound parameter/3 InF. It represents, in units
of l, the total additional dislocation length, including pri-
mary and "forest" dislocations, which results from one
average spreading loop. This clearly cannot be derived in
general because how much dislocation line gets trapped, and
in addition what length of "forest" dislocations is generated
on average per loop, depends strongly on temperature and
crystal geometry. The best one may hope in this regard is
to arrive at theoretical expressions for/3 under well-speci-
fied conditions.
The other parameter still needing discussion is the propor-
tionality constant which relates the average free dislocation
path (i.e., in the case of a dislocation cell structure the cell
diameter, L) to the average link length I. It is usually desig-
nated with the symbol g and should be amenable to theo-
retical analysis. Namely, since l is to a first approximation
inversely proportional to the flow stress according to
Eq. [14], proportionality between l and the cell diameter
means that in the framework of the meshlength theory, with-
in stage II, the average cell diameter is predicted to be
inversely proportional to (r - Zo). This is indeed found to
be very widely true. Thus Holt ~61 and Staker and Holt ~62
found from a survey of the literature that the average cell
diameter, L, in different metals is given by
L "~ K G b / r [23]
where K hovers about 10.
On the basis of the results of the computer calculations by
Bassim, ~46 van der Merwe and this writer have derived
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985--2103
Eq. [23] and the value of K as follows: m isolated dis-
location ceils in a matrix have longer-range "rotational"
stresses whose sign changes with the sense of rotation as-
sociated with the cell. It is for this reason that ceils are
predicted to arrange with alternating left-right-left-right
rotation, since in this way those rotational stresses largely
annihilate mutually. However, the rotational stresses cannot
be completely annihilated, and further it was known from
Reference 146 that their magnitude is proportional to the
cell diameter. Correspondingly, the remnant longer-range
dislocation cell stresses will tend to let the cell size shrink.
However, for a given dislocation content in the crystal,
shrinking cell sizes mean increasing distances between
neighboring dislocations in the cell walls, and hence in-
creased average dislocation line energy. The effect of the
dependence of dislocation line energy on cell size thus op-
poses that of the longer-range stresses. The actual cell size
is that which minimizes the total energy.
The outlined theory Hz indeed renders the equilibrium cell
size for a given dislocation content as proportional to the
root of the dislocation density, and thus inversely propor-
tional to (r - r0) in accordance with Eq. [14]. Albeit, on
account of our insufficiently detailed knowledge of the
energy stored in the discussed longer-range stresses, the
magnitude of K in Eq. [23] could be expressed only by in-
cluding a geometrical parameter, say k, whose value must
certainly depend on cell geometry but for roughly equi-
axed cells cannot be far from unity.
The magnitude of K = 10 was obtained with k = i/2.
Moreover, the parameter g = L/l was found at approxi-
mately g = 27/k 2. Now, experimentally, the lowest known
value of g was g = 14 obtained in Reference 109, while for
fcc single crystals in early stage II it is more typically 200.
These values thus suggest a range of k values between about
0.37 and 1.4. Finally, for such k values the remnant rota-
tional stresses of the dislocation cells are found to be near
the flow stress, which is indeed to be expected because the
network as a whole cannot support stresses above the flow
stress and conversely cannot decrease internal stresses much
below that level. Altogether, therefore, the values obtained
are most reasonable and correspondingly inspire much con-
fidence in the theory of cell sizes as outlined, m
H. Long-Range Stresses
Long-range stresses of a wavelength larger than the cell
size reduce rather than increase the flow stress. However, it
is unavoidable that at or slightly below the highest pre-
viously imposed stress some dislocation loops are on the
verge of becoming unstable whereas others have just bowed
out supercritically and have thereby released a glide loop
which locally relieved much of the applied stress. Thermal
activation can make the crucial difference for the release
of hair-trigger poised loops, and this is the cause of the
aftereffect and forward creep that were studied in Refer-
ences 8 through 10, 24, and 117, as also of loading and
unloading effects (e.g., References 163, 164; compare also
Reference 53).
The result of the discussed statistical nonuniformity of
link-bowing are plastic strain fluctuations. On unloading,
therefore, the material contains internal stresses also for this
reason. Bowed dislocation links give evidence of the dis-
cussed internal stresses, i.e., due to nonuniform loop genera-
2104--VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985
tion as well as the longer-range "rotational" cell stresses.
Together those produce internal stresses which reach but
generally do not exceed the flow stress of the material for the
reason indicated already, namely, that stresses below the
flow stress cannot be supported and above it cannot be
relieved by the dislocation network--unless some an-
nealing treatment has intervened, that is. The range of those
"longer-range" intemal stresses typically is not far from the
cell size. This, then, is the origin of the internal stresses
whose range compares with the cell diameters which have
been investigated by Mughrabi (e.g., Reference 165).
Variations in load application below the flow stress cause
quasi-elastic deformation due to reversible motions of net-
work dislocations about their equilibrium positions/
configurations. This manifests itself through an apparent
elastic modulus which is lower than for the defect-free ma-
terial. Masing appears to have been the first to point out this
effect. 166
I. Stable Dislocation Arrangements Other Than the
Dislocation Cell Structure
Clearly, the bulk of the evidence pertaining to work-
hardening can be explained by means of dislocation cells in
which the cell walls define (almost) stress-free cell interiors
which are rigidly rotated relative to their surroundings.
However, dislocation cells delineated by low-angle bound-
aries are not the only stable, low-energy form of dislocation
arrangement. Certainly, the Taylor lattice is another ex-
ample, and is to be expected when dislocations with only
one Burgers vector are present and these are not segregated
according to sign, as is the case in low-strain fatigue of
single crystals. Correspondingly, the loop patches observed
under these conditions have been successfully interpreted in
terms of the Taylor lattice. 167
Two further examples are also found in low strain fatigue,
namely, the dipolar walls in PSB's (persistent slip bands),
and the dislocation walls in the "maze structure". We may
also point to sequences of evenly spaced parallel tilt walls
formed in rolled [100] (001) oriented iron crystals. 168 The
spacing of all of these follows Eq. [23], it seems, and all
are assumed to be low-energy configurations, which was
more specifically demonstrated for the case of the walls in
the maze structure ~69 and the parallel tilt walls in rolled
iron crystals. 170
This, then, suggests that the "rotational" cell stresses by
means of which the proportionality between average link
length and cell spacing (i.e., L) could be explained, are not
a peculiarity of dislocation cell walls only, but more gener-
ally are an example of stresses associated with the termi-
nation of planar dislocation arrays in which neighboring
dislocations mutually screen each other's stress fields. Pre-
viously, such stresses have been invoked to account for the
striking geometry of the maze structure. 169By implication,
corresponding stresses associated with three-dimensional
stress-screened dislocation arrays may well be found to ex-
plain the veining structure outside of PSB's arising in low-
strain fatigue.
The similarity between the derivation of the Taylor theory
(Eqs. [5] through [9]) and that of stage III behavior in the
meshlength theory suggests that also in this regard a gener-
alization is possible. Namely, whether the dislocations pass
between neighboring dislocations, as in the Taylor network,
METALLURGICALTRANSACTIONS A
or bow out through the gaps between neighboring d~-
locations, the stress required is close to Gb/I ~ G b V p .
Significantly, this is the level of the unscreened stresses in
the network, as explained. It is therefore anticipated that the
meshlength theory has very wide applicability, including to
stress-screened dislocation arrangements other than the cell
structure, and to conditions in which not link bowing but the
overcoming of unscreened stresses is the limiting process,
e.g., as in the Taylor theory.
Seen within this wider framework, one may expect
stage II behavior whenever the dislocations assemble into a
stress-screened arrangement which remains similar to itself
while the mean free dislocation path shrinks in proportion
with the average dislocation spacing; and stage III behavior
when the mean free dislocation path remains constant even
while the resistance against flow is determined by un-
screened dislocation stresses. Correspondingly, stage II be-
havior could well follow rather than precede stage III, e.g.,
when initially the free dislocation path might be determined
by subgrain boundaries or precipitates and only later on by
cell walls. In turn, a second stage III could then follow.
Perhaps such cases have already been seen without having
been recognized.
J. Other Contributions
In spite of the numerous references already given, only
too many researchers who have made important con-
tributions to our understanding of workhardening have re-
mained unnamed, mainly for the reason that the topics of
hardening effects through grain boundaries, precipitates,
twinning, and surfaces have not been included in the present
survey. In the framework of the meshlength theory, these
express themselves in the magnitude of ~'0 or the stress at the
onset of stage II, respectively, but do not affect work-
hardening rates to any marked extent. Furthermore, the con-
tributions of the majority of authors appearing in any of the
references are typically much more wide-ranging and go far
beyond the brief mention that has mostly been made.
Beyond the authors included in the references, it is there-
fore a pleasant duty to acknowledge further the following
researchers: T.H. Alden, H. Alexander, Y. Bergstrrm,
L.M. Brown, R.W. Cahn, N.K. Chen, Y.T. Chou, J.P.
Christian, H. Conrad, L. Delaey, A. Deruyttere, D. Dew-
Hughes, P. Feltham, J. T. Fourie, W. Frank, H. Fujita, H. L.
Gaigher, J. J. Gilman, E. G/Sttler, T. Imura, W. G. Johnston,
S. Karlsson, A.S. Keh, I.R. Kramer, L.P. Kubin, R.
Lagneborg, J.H. Lambermont, A. Lawley, D. Lloyd, A.
Luft, J. L. Lytton, H. Margolin, H. Mecking, L.E. Murr,
H.M. Otte, E Ramsteiner, W. Reitzenstein, W. Roberts,
G. Schoeck, Ch. Schwink, B. Sestak, J.W. Steeds, H.
Suzuki, T. Takeuchi, H. M. Thieringer, G. Thomas, A. W.
Thompson, H.G. van Bueren, V. Vitek, J. Washburn, S.
Weissmann, E W. Young, N. Yukawa; and even with these
the list is certainly not exhausted, partly probably through
oversights, but partly also because we have concentrated
on theory at the expense of experimental work, have not
considered temperature-dependent effects and creep to any
significant extent, and not alloy hardening nor work on
technological metals and alloys.
METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS A
IV. OUTLOOK
The above survey of the evolution of workhardening the-
ory through the past fifty years will have made it clear that
the basics are well understood. A guiding principle which
has emerged is that, unavoidably, glide dislocations get
trapped in the material as they move into low-energy config-
urations such that they occupy positions of relative energy
minimum, or that the driving forces to cause further energy
reduction fall below the frictional stress opposing glide.
Correspondingly, the resulting structures minimize the
stored energy within the boundary conditions. Among
these, the availability of glide systems is of overriding im-
portance because increasing the number of participating
Burgers vector directions permits the construction of net-
works of lower energy. Also the mobility of the dislocations
is fundamentally important, because the lowest achievable
energy is that of the defect-free crystal. This is the basis for
the effectiveness of annealing treatments, namely, that they
transiently increase the mobility of the dislocations, includ-
ing climb and cross slip. Albeit, for several reasons vari-
ously discussed (e.g., References 107, 109, and 110) this
writer considers that the evidence against cross slip playing
any important role in the onset of stage III is irrefutable.
The way is now open toward a predictive theory of work-
hardening, with the ultimate aim of being able to tailor-
make alloys with desired mechanical properties. We are far
from this goal as yet, and much purposeful research is still
needed, but the path may already be discerned rather clearly.
For example, even while according to present best evidence
the theory closely reproduces stages II and III of the work-
hardening curve in many cases, there is little doubt that
refinements can and must be applied in order to take account
of temperature effects, cutting, or other reorganization of
precipitates, texture formation, establishment of defor-
mation or transition bands, etc. Very much work remains to
be done in this area.
Urgently needed, too, are detailed experimental inves-
tigations of the dislocation configurations formed in actual
cases, besides the few studied already. We should like to
know whether indeed the free dislocation path is constant in
stage III; whether cell formation, but on a larger scale, also
takes place in stage II of c~-brass type alloys; how the de-
scribed dislocation cells at the onset of stage II change when
double glide starts; how the cell structure develops in crys-
tals containing various precipitates, etc. Thence it may be-
come possible to evolve empirical principles by which to
predict dislocation arrangements and their mode of evo-
lution under a great variety of conditions, e.g., rolling of
hexagonal polycrystals with a c/a ratio above close packing
and a pyramidal twinning mode; or wire drawing of an fcc
alloy with hard precipitates of given size and orientation.
The perhaps most urgent task for theoreticians now is to
expand the theory of low-angle dislocation boundaries. At
this point we cannot even tell which, among the infinitude
of possible low-angle boundaries on a specified plane and
with specified axis of rotation, has the lowest energy, as was
already recognized by Read 1~ and Ball. 171Much less do we
have a theory to determine, under specified boundary condi-
tions of Burgers vector directions and dislocation mobility,
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985--2105
the orientation and axis of rotation of that low-angle bound-
ary which, among all possible boundaries containing a given
density of primary dislocations, has the lowest energy. To
derive that theory is a primary challenge to theoreticians in
the field of workhardening because the described boundary
is presumably the most prominent one in the cell structure
which forms in actual fact, and if not, then that will be most
instructive to know.
Equally challenging and important will be the theoretical
investigation of the longer-range stresses associated with
terminating stress-screened dislocation arrangements. And
closely dependent on progress in that area is the theoretical
task of predicting the lowest-energy shape and size of dis-
location cells that can be constructed with a specific selec-
tion of Burgers vector directions.
Altogether, therefore, there is a wide-open field of ex-
citing research waiting to be done, and the rewards which
beckon are high.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The financial support of this research through the Mate-
rials Division (Tribology) of the Office of Naval Research,
Arlington, VA, is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
1. E. Orowan: Z. Physik, 1934, vol. 89, p. 605.
2. E. Orowan: Z. Physik, 1934, vol. 89, p. 614.
3. E. Orowan: Z. Physik, 1934, vol. 89, p. 634.
4. E. Orowan: Z. Physik, 1935, vol. 97, p. 573.
5. E. Orowan: Z. Physik, 1935/6, vol. 98, p. 382.
6. M. Polanyi: Z. Physik, 1934, vol. 89, p. 660.
7. G.I. Taylor: Proc. Roy. Soc. 1934, vol. A145, p. 362.
8. R. Becker: Physikal. Zeits., 1925, vol. 26, p. 919.
9. R. Becker: Zeits. f. techn. Physik, 1926, vol. 7, p. 547.
10. R. Becket and W. Boas: Metallwirtschaft, 1929, vol. 8, p. 317.
11. L. Prandtl: Zeits. angew. Math. u. Mechanik, 1928, vol. 8, p. 85.
12. U. Dehlinger: Ann. d. Physik, 1929, vol. 2, p. 749.
13. G. Masing and M. Polanyi: Ergebn. exakt. Naturw., 1923, vol. 2,
p. 177.
14. A.E.H. Love: A Treatise on the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity,
Cambridge University Press, 1927 app. to chpts. VIII and IX.
15. W.G. Burgers and J.M. Burgers: Proc. Acad. Sci. Amsterdam,
1935, vol. 15, no. 3.
16. W.G. Burgers: "Plastizit~it der Kristalle," in Elastizitiik, Plastizitiit
und Stuktur der Materie, R. Houwink, Akad. Vedagsges, Leipzig,
1938.
17. W.G. Burgers: "Rekristallisation, verformter Zustand und
Erholung" in Handbuch der Metallphysik, G. Masing, Akad.
Verlagsges, Leipzig, 1941, vol. 3/2.
18. U. Dehlinger: Chemische Physik der Metal& und Legierungen,
Akad. Verlagsges, Leipzig, 1939, p. 152.
19. A. Kochend6rfer: Z. KristaUographie, 1937, vol. 97, p. 263.
20. A. Kochend6rfer: Plastische Eigenschaften von Kristallen und
metallischen Werkstoffen, Springer, Berlin, 1941.
21. E. Schmid and W. Boas: Plasticity of Crystals, trans, of
Kristallplastizitdt mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung der Metalle,
1935, E A. Hughes & Co., London, 1950.
22. C. E Elam: Distortion of Metal Crystals, Clarendon Press, Oxford,
1935.
23. J.M. Burgers: Proc. Acad. Sci. Amsterdam, 1939, vol. 42, pp. 293,
378.
24. D. Kuhlmann and G. Masing: Z. Metallkunde, 1948, vol. 39,
p. 361.
25. D. Kuhlmann, G. Masing, and J. Raffelsieper: Z. Metallkunde,
1949, vol. 40, p. 241; see also G. Masing and J. Raffelsieper:
Z. Metallkunde, 1950, vol. 41, p. 65.
26. W. Voigt: Ann. Physik (4), 1919, vol. 60, p. 638.
2106--VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985
27. N. E Mott and F. R. N. Nabarro: Proc. Phys. Soc., 1940, vol. 52,
p. 86.
28. N. E Mott: J. Inst. Metals (London), 1946, vol. 72, p. 367.
29. P. Haasen: Physical Metallurgy, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge/London, 1978, trl. of Physikalische MetaUkunde, Spring-
er Berlin, 1974.
30. Constitutive Equations in Plasticity, A. S. Argon, ed., MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1975.
31. U. E Kocks, A.S. Argon, and M.F. Ashby: Thermodynamics and
Kinetics of Slip, Pergamon Press, New York, NY, 1975.
32. F. R. N. Nabarro, Z.S. Basinski, and D.B. Holt: Advances in
Physics, 1964, vol. 13, p. 193.
33. Z.S. Basinski: Phil. Mag., 1959, vol. 4, p. 393.
34. S.J. Basinski and Z.S. Basinski: Dislocations in Solids, F. R. N.
Nabarro, ed., North-Holland Publ. Co, Amsterdam, 1979, vol. 4,
pp. 26t-362.
35. E R. N. Nabarro: 1947Bristol Conference on the Strength of Solids,
The Physical Society, London, 1948, p. 38.
36. E.N. da C. Andrade: Proc. Roy. Soc., 1910, vol. A84, p. 1; 1914,
vol. A90, p. 329.
37. M. Kornfeld: Phys. Z. Sowjet Union, 1936, vol. 10, p. 605.
38. L. Boltzmann: Sitzungsber. Akad. Wien (2), 1874, vol. 70, pp. 70,
275; Poggendorfs Ann. (Erg. Bd.), 1876, vol. 8, p. 624.
39. E. Wiechert: Ann., 1893, vol. 50, p. 335,546.
40. E.v. Schweidler: Ann., 1907, vol. 24, p. 711.
41. W. Wagner: Ann., 1913, vol. 40, p. 817.
42. R. Becker: Z. Physik, 1925, vol. 33, p. 185.
43. D. Kuhlmann: Z. Physik, 1947, vol. 124, p. 468.
44. N.F. Mott and F. R. N. Nabarro: 1947 Bristol Conference on the
Strength of Solids, The Physical Society, London, 1948, p. 11.
45. E. Orowan: J. West of Scotland Iron and Steel Institute, 1946-7,
vol. 54, p. 45.
46. E R. N. Nabarro: Z. Metallkunde, 1949, vol. 40, p. 81.
47. F. Seitz and T. A. Read: J. Appl. Phys., 1941, vol. 12, pp. 100, 170,
471, and 538.
48. J.S. Koehler: Phys. Rev., 1941, vol. 60, p. 397.
49. R. Maddin, C.H. Mathewson, and W.R. Hibbard: Trans. AIME,
1948, vol. 175, p. 86.
50. R. Maddin, C.H. Mathewson, and W. R. Hibbard: Metals Trans.,
1949, vol. 185, p. 527.
51. C.L. Smith: Proc. Phys. Soc., 1948, vol. 61, p. 201.
52. E C. Frank: The Strength of Solids, Physical Soc., London, 1948,
p. 46.
53. D. Kuhlmann: Proc. Phys. Soc., 1951, vol. A64, p. 140.
54. E C. Frank and W. T. Read: Phys. Rev., 1950, vol. 79, p. 722.
55. P.A. Jacquet: Acta Metall., 1954, vol. 2, p. 752.
56. B.A. Bilby and A. R. Entwistle: Acta MetaU., 1956, vol. 4, p. 257.
57. J.J. Gilman: Trans. AIME, 1956, vol. 8, p. 998.
58. J.D. Meakin and H. G. F. Wilsdorf: Trans. AIME, 1960, vol. 218,
p. 745.
59. G. Leibfried: Z. Physik, 1951, vol. 130, p. 124;ZS. angew. Physik,
1954, vol. 6, p. 251; see also G. Leibfried and P. Haasen: Nachr.
Akad. Wiss., G6ttingen, Math. Phys. KI., 1954, p. 31.
60. J.D. Eshelby, F. C. Frank, and F. R. N. Nabarro: Phil. Mag., 1951,
vol. 42, p. 351.
61. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, J.H. van der Merwe, and H. G. F.
Wilsdorf: Phil. Mag., 1952, vol. 43, p. 632.
62. N.F. Mott: Phil. Mag., 1952, vol. 43, p. 1151.
63. N.F. Mott: Phil. Mag., 1953, vol. 44, p. 741.
64. N. E Mott: Trans. Met. Soc. AIME, 1960, vol. 218, p. 218.
65. A. Seeger, J. Diehl, S. Mader, and H. Rebstock: Phil. Mag., 1957,
vol. 2, p. 323.
66. A. Seeger: in Dislocations and Mechanical Properties of Crystals,
J.C. Fisher, W.G. Johnston, R. Thomson, and T. Vreeland, eds.,
John Wiley, New York, NY, 1957, p. 243.
67. A. Seeger: Handbuch der Physik, S. Fliigge, ed., Springer, Berlin,
1958, vol. VII/2, p. 1.
68. P.B. Hirsch: Relationship Between Structure and Mechanical Prop-
erties of Metals, H. M. Stationery Office, London, 1963, p. 39.
69. P.B. Hirsch: Disc. Faraday Soc., 1964, vol. 38, p. 111.
70. P.B. Hirsch and T. E. Mitchell: Work Hardening, J. P. Hirth and J.
Weertman, eds., Gordon and Breach, New York, NY, 1968, p. 65.
71. P.B. Hirsch and T.E. Mitchell: Can. J. Phys., 1967, vol. 45,
p. 663.
72. W.A. Jesser and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Mat. Sci. Eng., 1981,
vol. 51, p. 31.
73. W. Bollmann: Phys. Rev., 1956, vol. 103, p. 1588.
METALLURGICALTRANSACTIONS A
 74. P.B. Hirsch, R.W. Home, and M.J. Whelan: Phil. Mag., 1956,
vol. 1, p. 677.
75. R.D. Heidenreich: J. Appl. Phys., 1949, vol. 20, p. 993.
76. F.C. Frank: Disc. Faraday, Soc., 1949, vol. 5, p. 48.
77. W.K. Burton, N. Cabrera, and E C. Frank: Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc.,
1951, vol. A243, p. 299.
78. A.R. Verma: Crystal Growth and Dislocations, Butterworths,
London, 1973.
79. S. Amelinckx: The Direct Observation of Dislocations, Academic
Press, New York/London, 1964.
80. J.M. Hedges and J.W. Mitchell: Phil. Mag., 1953, vol. 44,
pp. 223, 357.
81. P.B. Hirsch, A. Howie, R. B. Nicholson, D. W. Pashley, and M. J.
Whelan: Electron Microscopy of Thin Crystals, Plenum Press, New
York, NY-Butterworths, London, 1965.
82. H.G.F. Wilsdorf and J. Schmitz: J. Appl. Phys., 1962, vol. 33,
p. 1750.
83. H.G. E Wilsdorf, and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Phys. Rev. Lett.,
1959, vol. 3, p. 170.
84. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, R. Maddin, and H. G. F. Wilsdorf:
Strengthening Mechanisms in Solids, J.J. Harwood, ed., ASM,
Metals Park, OH, 1962, p. 137.
85. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf and H. G. F. Wilsdorf: Acta Metall., 1962,
vol. 10, p. 584.
86. H.G. E Wilsdorf and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: J. Nuclear Matls.,
1962, vol. 5, p. 178.
87. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf and H. G. E Wilsdorf: Electron Microscopy
and Strength of Crystals, G. Thomas and J. Washburn, eds., Inter-
science Publ., John Wiley, New York, NY, 1963, p. 575.
88. K. Sezaki and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdoff: Acta MetaU., 1966, vol. 14,
p. 1131.
89. R. Maddin and A. H. Cottrell: Phil. Mag., 1955, vol. 46, p. 735.
90. H. Kimura, R. Maddin, and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Acta Metall.,
1959, vol. 7, p. 154.
91. A.H. Cottrell: Vacancies and Other Point Defects in Metals and
Alloys, Inst. of Metals Monograph #23, London, 1958, p. 1.
92. H. Kimura and R. Maddin: Quench Hardening in Metals, North-
Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam/London, 1971.
93. J.E. Bauerle and J. S. Koehler: Phys. Rev., 1957, vol. 107, p. 1493.
94. J.S. Koehler, F. Seitz, and J.E. Bauerle: Phys. Rev., 1957,
vol. 107, p. 1499.
95. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Phil. Mag., 1958, vol. 3, p. 125.
96. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, R. Maddin, and H. Kirnura: Z.
Metallkunde, 1958, vol. 49, p. 584.
97. H. Kimura, R. Maddin, and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Acta Metall.,
1959, vol. 7, p. 145.
98. E Seitz: Phys. Rev., 1950, vol. 79, pp, 723, 890, and 1002.
99. Lattice Defects in Quenched Metals, R. M. J. Cotterill, M. Doyama,
J. J. Jackson, and M. Meshii, eds., Academic Press, New York, NY,
1965.
100. I.G. Greenfield and H. G. F. Wilsdorf: Naturwiss., 1960, vol. 47,
p. 395.
101. K. Sezaki and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Acta Metall., 1966, vol. 14,
p. 1131.
102. T.J. Koppenaal and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Appl. Phys. Letters,
1964, vol. 4.
103. N. E Mott: Proc. Phys. Soc., 1951, vol. B64 (2), p. 729.
104. W.T. Read: Dislocations in Crystals, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY,
1953.
105. A.H. Cottrell: Dislocations and Plastic Flow in Crystals, Clarendon
Press, Oxford, 1953.
106. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Trans. Met. Soc. AIME, 1962, vol. 224,
p. 1047.
107. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, H.J. Levinstein, W.H. Robinson, and
H. G. F. Wilsdorf: J. Aust. Inst. Met., 1963, vol. 8, p. 102.
108. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: in Work Hardening, J.P. Hirth and J.
Weertman, eds., Gordon and Breach, New York, NY, 1968, p. 97.
109. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Metall. Trans., 1970, vol. 1, p. 3173.
110. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: in Workhardening in Tension and Fatigue,
A.W. Thompson, ed., AIME, 1977, p. 1.
111. L.E. Murr and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Acta Metall., 1978, vol. 26,
p. 847.
112. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf and J. H. van der Merwe: Matls. Sci. Engg.,
1982, vol. 55, p. 79.
113. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf and N. Comins: Matls. Sci. Engg., 1983,
vol. 60, p. 7.
METALLURGICALTRANSACTIONS A
114. J.S. Koehler: Phys. Rev., 1952, vol. 86, p. 52.
115. P. Haasen and G. Leibfried: Z. Physik, 1952, vol. 131, p. 538.
116. P. Haasen: Z. Physik, 1953, vol. 136, p. 26.
117. P. Haasen and G. Leibfried: Z. Metallkunde, 1952, vol. 43, p. 317.
118. P. Haasen: Phil. Mag., 1958, vol. 3, p. 384.
119. P. Haasen and A. Seeger: in Halbleiterprobleme IV, W. Schottky,
ed., Vieweg and Son, Braunschweig, 1958, p. 68.
120. W. in der Schmitten and P. Haasen: J. Appl. Phys., 1961, vol. 32,
p. 1790.
121. K. Liicke and H. Lange: Z. Metallkunde, 1952, vol. 43, p. 55.
122. J. Friedel: Dislocations, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1956.
123. J. Friedel: Phil. Mag., 1955, vol. 46, p. 1169.
124. J. Friedel and G. Saada: in Work Hardening, J.P. Hirth and J.
Weertman, eds., Gordon and Breach, New York, NY, 1968, p. 1.
125. C.W. MacGregor and L. E. Welch: Trans. AIME, 1943, vol. 154,
p. 423.
126. A.H. Cottrell and R. J. Stokes: Proc. Roy. Soc., 1955, vol. A233,
p. 17.
127. K.R. Evans and W.F. Flanagan: phys. stat. sol., 1967, vol, 22,
p. 195.
128. K.R. Evans and W. E Flanagan: Phil. Mag., 1968, vol. 17, p. 535.
129. K.R. Evans, D. J. Bailey, and W. E Flanagan:phys. stat. sol., 1967,
vol. 22, p. 607.
130. P.B. Hirsch and D.H. Warrington: Phil. Mag., 1961, vol. 6,
p. 735.
131. W.M. Lomer: Phil. Mag., 1951, vol. 42, p. 1327.
132. A.H. Cottrell: Phil. Mag., 1952, vol. 43, p. 645.
133. P.J. Jackson and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Scripta Met., 1982,
vol. 16, p. 105.
134. A. Seeger: in Work Hardening, J.P. Hirth and J. Weertman, eds.,
Gordon and Breach, New York, NY, 1968, p. 27.
135. Work Hardening, J.P. Hirth and J. Weertman eds., Gordon and
Breach, New York, NY, 1968.
136. U. E Kocks, A. S. Argon, and M. E Ashby: Thermodynamics and
Kinetics of Slip, Pergamon Press, New York, NY, 1975.
137. U. E Kocks, H. S. Chen, D. A. Rigney, and R. J. Schaefer: in Work
Hardening, J. P. Hirth and J. Weertman, eds., Gordon and Breach,
New York, NY, 1968, p. 151.
138. J.G. Sevillano, P. van Houtte, and E. Aernoudt: Prog. Mater. Sci.,
1980, vol. 25, p. 164.
139. J. E Bell: Phil. Mag., 1964, vol. 10, pp. 10, 107; 1965, vol. 11,
p. 1135.
140. T.E. Mitchell and R. L. Smialek: in Work Hardening, J. P. Hirth and
J. Weertman, eds., Gordon and Breach, New York, NY, 1968,
p. 365.
141. S. Mader, A. Seeger, and C. Leitz: J. Appl. Phys., 1963, vol. 34,
p. 3368.
142. G. Langford and M. Cohen: Trans. ASM, 1969, vol. 62, p. 623.
143. H.J. Rack and M. Cohen: Mat. Sci. Engg., 1970, vol. 6, p. 320.
144. J.T. Moore and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: J, Appl. Phys., 1970,
vol. 41, p. 4411; 1971, vol. 42, pp. 953, 3717, and 3726.
145. J.T. Moore and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: in Grainboundaries and
Interfaces, P. Chaudhari and J.W. Matthews, eds., North Holland
Publishing Co., Amsterdam/New York, 1972. See also Surface
Science, 1972, vol. 31, p. 456.
146. M.N. Bassim and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: phys. stat. sol. (a) 1973,
vol. 15, p. 725; 1973, vol. 16, pp. 241,281, and 379; 1973, vol. 19,
p. 335.
147. J. C. M. Li: J. Austr. Inst. Metals, 1963, vol. 8, p. 206.
148. J.T. Fourie, P.J. Jackson, D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D.A. Rigney,
J.H. van tier Merwe, and H. G. E Wilsdorf: Scripta Met., 1982,
vol. 16, p. 157.
149. P.D.K. Nathanson, P. J. Jackson, and D. R. Spalding: ActaMetall.,
1980, vol. 28, p. 823.
150. O.L. de Lange, P. J. Jackson, and P. D. K. Nathanson: Acta MetaU.,
1980, vol. 28, p. 833.
151. P.J. Jackson, O.L. de Lange, and P.D.K. Nathanson: in Dis-
location Modelling of Physical Systems, C. S. Hartley, M. E Ashby,
R. Bullough, and J. P. Hirth, eds., Pergamon, Oxford, 1981,
152. P.J. Jackson, O. L. de Lange, and C. J. Young: ActaMetall., 1982,
vol. 30, p. 483.
153. G.I. Taylor: Trans. Faraday Soc., 1928, vol. 24, p. 121.
154. K. Yamaguchi: Sci. Pap. Inst. Phys. Chem. Res. (Jpn), 1929,
vol. 11, p. 151.
155. D.M. Moon and W. H. D. Robinson: Can. J. Phys., 1967, vol. 45,
p. 567.
VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985--2107
156. U. Essmann: phys. stat. sol., 1965, vol. 12, p. 732.
157. P. Gassenmeier and M. Wilkins: phys. star. sol., 1968, vol. 30,
p. 833.
158. C.S. Pande and P.M. ,Hazzledine: Phil. Mag., 1971, vol. 24,
p. 1393.
159. E C. Frank: Pittsburgh Syrup. on the Plastic Deformation of Crys-
talline Solids, Rep. NAVEXOS-P-834, Office of Naval Research,
Washington, DC, 1950, p. 150.
160. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: J. Appl. Phys., 1962, vol. 33, p. 648.
161. D.L. Holt: J. Appl. Phys., 1970, vol. 41, p. 3197.
162. M.R. Staker and D. L. Holt: Acta Metall., 1972, vol. 20, p. 569.
163. A.H. Cottrell and V. Aytekin: J. Inst. Met., 1950, vol. 77, p. 389.
2108--VOLUME 16A, DECEMBER 1985
164. P. Haasen and A. Kelly: Acta Metall., 1957, vol. 5, p. 192.
165. H. Mughrabi: J. Microsc. Spectrosc. Electron., 1976, vol. 1,
p. 571.
166. G. Masing: Z. Physik, 1947, vol. 124, p. 586.
167. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Mat. Sci. Engg., 1979, vol. 39, p. 231.
168. B. Grzemba and H. Hu: Z. Memtlkunde, 1969, vol. 60, p. 944.
169. P. Charsley and D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf: Phil. Mag., 1981,
vol. A44, p. 1351.
170. D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf and E, Aemoudt: J. Appl. Phys., 1983,
vol. 54, p. 184.
17l. C.J. Ball: Phil. Mag., 1957, vol. 2, p. 977.
METALLURGICALTRANSACTIONS A