Relationship between bulk modulus and elastic constant

only1892
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I am getting the bulk modulus from fitting the equation of states and calculating the elastic constant. It seems that there is some relationship between bulk modulus B and elastic constant Cij, B=Cij/9,where i,j run from 1 to 3.
But my result is far away from this, say B=50 from fitting EOS and B=300 from elastic constant. Is this resonable or B=Cij/9 cann't be applied to some material(structure)?

Thanks a lot!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The relationship between the bulk modulus and the elastic constants is:

B = 1/3 (C11 + 2*C12) for polycrystalline, isotropic cubic crystals

If the material has lower symmetry like a orthorhombic material it would have more independent elastic constants. Remember the concept of the bulk modulus was developed for polycrystalline material only. Not that single crystals don't resist volumetric distortion - of course they do. This resistance is going to be system specific and to give further details I need more info.

Regards

Modey3
 
To add, if the system is not cubic, there are two possibilities for the polycrystalline Bulk Modulus from the elastic constants.

Voight Average:

9B = ( c11 + c22 + c33 ) + 2*(c12 + c13 + c23)

Reuss Average

1/B = ( s11 + s22 + s33 ) + 2*(s12 + s13 + s23);

Details in the paper

"The Elastic Behaviour of a Crystalline Aggregate", by R.Hill.

Proceedings of the Physical Society of London, Section A. Vol 65, No 5. May 1952,pp349-354.
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...
Back
Top