EGU25-305, updated on 14 Mar 2025
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-305
EGU General Assembly 2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Oral | Monday, 28 Apr, 14:40–14:50 (CEST)
 
Room 0.16
The energy of grain boundaries and interfaces in metamorphic rocks: comparison of natural materials with experimental charges
Marian Holness1 and Brendan Dyck2
Marian Holness and Brendan Dyck
  • 1University of Cambridge, Department of Earth Sciences, Cambridge, United Kingdom of Great Britain (marian@esc.cam.ac.uk)
  • 2Department of Earth & Environmental Sciences, The University of British Columbia, 3247 University Way, Kelowna, B.C., V1V1V7, Canada (brendan.dyck@ubc.ca)

The relative magnitude of the energies of grain boundaries and heterophase interfaces in texturally equilibrated materials can be measured using the dihedral angle method, which is based on the control of the geometry of three-grain junctions involving two different phases by the relationship γAA = 2γAB cos (Θ/2), where Θ is the dihedral angle, γAA is the energy of the AA grain boundary and γAB is that of the heterophase interface. We have compiled a dataset of dihedral angles between 35 mineral pairs found in well-equilibrated granulite-facies rocks. Such a dataset permits the ranking of grain boundary energies, and we find that this ranking correlates with that of the crystalloblastic series. More significantly, we also find that for almost all mineral pairs, both dihedral angles (i.e. those at both AAB and BBA junctions) are <120˚, meaning that the energy of the heterophase interface is lower than that of either grain boundary. An analogous situation occurs in nearly all binary systems of metals. One notable exception is the Zn-Sn pair for which one angle is <120˚ and the other is >120˚, meaning that the energy of the heterophase interface is intermediate between that of the two grain boundaries. This intermediate situation is also observed in experimental mineral charges created by hot-pressing powders, and matches the predictions of a simple model of interfaces involving randomly oriented crystal lattices. That neither metamorphic rocks nor most metals fit this theoretical framework must be a consequence of the creation and preservation of low-energy heterophase interfaces during solidification, reaction, deformation and grain growth. Preliminary work shows that epitaxy governs the location and orientation of nucleation in most metamorphic reactions, resulting in low-energy heterophase interfaces. One corollary of our results is that textural maturation of metamorphic rocks generally results in phase mixing rather than separation and layer formation. Furthermore, that dislocations can cross epitaxial heterophase interfaces, and that the rate of migration of interfaces is dependent on their energy, means that an understanding of rock rheology and microstructural development derived from experimental studies using initially hot-pressed powders may not be directly applicable to natural systems.

How to cite: Holness, M. and Dyck, B.: The energy of grain boundaries and interfaces in metamorphic rocks: comparison of natural materials with experimental charges, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-305, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-305, 2025.