TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

To: Dr. Selis Önel, KMU479 Course Instructor

Elvan Konuk, M.S., Teaching Assistant
From: Pınar Ertenoğlu , 21625219; Esranur Ünal, 21625645; Ecem İliter, 21625281; Müge
Yılmaz, 21725682; Melisa Tunçer, 21725591
Subject: Construction of Model Unit Cells
Date: November 24, 2020
Course: Material Science and Technology II

SUMMARY

In this Construction of Model Unit Cells Lab, ping-pong balls are used to build the
crystal structures and a ruler used to measure diameters of balls and calculating volume and
several properties. The simplest repeating unit in a crystal is called a unit cell. Each unit cell is
defined in terms of lattice points. Three-dimensional crystal describes by specifying the size,
shape, and contents of the simplest repeating unit.

There are three most common crystal structures, Body Centered Cubic (BCC), Face
Centered Cubic (FCC) and Hexagonal Close Packed (HCP). Similarities and differences of
them observed and properties such as Lattice Parameters, Atomic Packing Factor, and volume
are calculated for each model. Interplanar Spacing Values and maximum and minimum
Interstitial Voids are calculated for these models individually and all structures compared with
others with the properties such as Size of interstitial voids, Packing factors, Interplanar
distances, and volumes. Close packed structures and closest packed structures defined and
examined.

HCP structure has 17 balls (atoms) FCC has 14 and BCC has 9 balls. Atomic packing
factor is the same in FCC and HCP structures. FCC has the highest lattice parameter and HCP
has lowest. and for the volumes, calculated and measured values observed disproportionate.
FCC has the highest measured interplanar distance and BCC has the lowest. %error calculations
made between measured and calculated values. Geometric structure characteristics,
calculations, theoric terms and error reasons discussed at the end.
INTRODUCTION

In the Construction of Model Unit Cells lab project, body-centered cubic (BCC), face-
centered cubic (FCC) and hexagonal close packed (HCP) crystal structures and unit cells were
modeled. The objectives for this lab project is to compare these three crystal structures,
observing the similarities and differences between them and constructing simple cubic and
closed-packed structures.

In crystal systems, there is a special name given to the close-packed plane in a HCP unit
cell, whose name is basal planes. There is a similar term with the close-packed plane, which is
the closest-packed. Close-packed in crystals refers to space efficient arrangement of constituent
particles in a crystal lattice. And closest-packed structures refers to the most tightly packed
composition of crystal structures. [1]

The structures where the planes are

stacked on top of each other are usually
expressed in letters A, B, C according to the
similarity of the models. And models that are
expressed in the form such as ABAB,
ABCAB are called stacking sequences. [2]

Figure 1: The ABABAB stacking sequence of

close-packed planes produces the HCP structure [2]

In this lab, three dimensional structures are investigated. It is not always easy to imagine
a multidimensional structure. Making these models is important in terms of tangible observation
of the mentioned BCC, FCC and HCP structures. The following elements can be given as an
example for each structure;

BCC - Sodium (Na), Rubidium (Rb), Tungsten (W)

FCC - Gold (Au), Aluminum (Al), Calcium (Ca)

HCP – Cobalt (Co), Zinc (Zn), Magnesium (Mg)

In order to show these three crystal structures in a tangible way, different models were
made by using ping-pong balls. In this simple and affordable method to model these structures,
glue is used to attach balls together to form layers.

2
1.EXPERIMENTAL METHOD & ANALYSIS

1.1 Aim of Experiment

❖ Identify and learn Hexagonal Close Packed, Face Centered Cubic and Body Centered
Cubic structure.
❖ Determination of experimental and calculated interplanar distance and compared
different behaviours.
❖ Maximum and minimum diameter interstitial atoms for Hexagonal Close Packed, Face
Centered Cubic and Body Centered Cubic structure.

1.2 Experimental Apparatus

❖ Ping pong balls

Figure 2. BCC, FCC and HCP structure[3]

1.3 Experimental Procedure

Body Centered Cubic (BCC), Face Centered Cubic (FCC) and Hexagonal Close Packed
(HCP) structures were prepared with 9, 14, 17 ping pong balls. Diameters are recorded for each
ping pong ball. Average diameter was obtained. Measured volume was calculated with number
of ball times ball volume. Calculated volume was found for each structure using a lattice
parameter. Atomic packing factor and interplanar distance was calculated. Radius ratio
rinterstitial/rinterval was calculated. Maximum and minimum diameter of interstitial atoms were

found using rinterstitial/rinterval ratio

3
2. RESULT & DISCUSSION

Table 1. Measured diameters of ping pong balls

Each diameters of ping pong balls were recorded as 3.7 cm and average diameter was recorded
3.7 cm.

Table 2. Model Construction of Data

First of all, the lattice parameters of BCC, FCC, and HCP structures were calculated with given
data values. With these lattice parameter values, a volume value for each structure was
calculated. It is seen that there are certain differences between the calculated values and the
measured (given values). As is known, this experiment was carried out with ping pong balls
and the volume was measured at intervals measured with a ruler. In other words, this
measurement was made without using a parameter dependent on diameter. This may be the
most obvious reason for the differences. Later, the volumes of the substances were calculated
using the lattice parameters found and their atomic packing factors values were calculated.
These values were calculated as expected. Error rate was calculated between theoretical and
experimental volume. It was found 38.8% for BCC structure, 37.8% for FCC structure and
175.4% for HCP structure. Size of ping pong balls may be the cause of error. Ping pong ball
that have much smaller size, it can be more closer than literature value.

4
Table 3. Measures interplanar distances

Ping pong balls were located as BCC, FCC and HCP structure and interplanar distance was
measured between two ping pong balls using a ruler.

Table 4. Calculated interplanar distances

Secondly, using the lattice parameters and coordinates of the substances, interplanar distance
values were calculated. The calculated and measured values in this part were very close to each
other for Face Centered Cubic and Body Centered Cubic structures. However, the measured
and calculated values for Hexagonal close pack structure were not as close as the others.
Interplanar error rate was found 0.7% at 100, 8.5% at 110, 1.6% at 111 for BCC structure. 1.3%
at 100, 0% at 110, 8.5% at 111 for FCC structure. 26.7% at 0001, 38.4% at 0002 for HCP
structure. Structures of BCC and FCC act like similar behaviour and their error rates were found
very close to calculated values. Hexagonal close pack has a more complicated structure than
others. It may be cause of an error.

5
Table 5. Calculated interstitial Sites

For BCC, FCC and HCP, possible maximum radius and minimum radius values were calculated
by making comments of their geometric structures. As a result, FCC and HCP structure has the
largest diameter. Diameter values were found as expected according to the reference table that
given in the appendix section.[4] BCC structure has trigonal and octahedral types. Diameter of
trigonal type was calculated 0.15 and diameter of octahedral type was calculated 0.29. Radius
calculation was made for octahedral and tetrahedral types for HCP and FCC. Their radius were
found to be similar because their coordination numbers are also similar. The radius ratio for
octahedral was found to be 0.414, and the radius ratio for tetrahedral was found to be 0.225 . In
the HCP structure, it was observed that the octahedral radius ratio was greater than the
tetrahedral radius ratio. Maximum radius and minimum radius values were calculated using the
radius ratios. In general, the smallest radius was obtained in the trigonal type of the BCC
structure.

6
3. CONCLUSION

In this experiment the main goal is to identify and learn body centered cubic (BCC),
face centered cubic (FCC) and hexagonal close packed (HCP) structures and their behaviors.
Models were created with ping-pong balls to examine these structures and a ruler was used to
measure certain parameters of these structures. Diameter of each balls were recorded and
average diameter was obtained. Volume was calculated as measured and theoretical. Then
lattice parameters were found with measured diameters and calculated volume was obtained.

Error rates were calculated between measured and calculated volumes. Error rates found
as 38.8% for BCC, 37.8% for FCC and 178.4% for HCP. One of the reasons why the error is
too high in the HCP may caused of that the measured values were obtained by using ruler while
the calculated ones were obtained from the lattice parameters. The values for BCC and FCC
structures were found similar to each other. This may be due to the simple cubic structure of
both crystals.

To compare the volumes calculated depending on the atomic diameter, we can say that
the HCP structure has the largest volume. The values found for the FCC and BCC in interplanar
distance calculations were very close with the measured values. That's why the error rates were
found very low. However, we achieved an error rate of around 30% for HCP. The fact that HCP
has a more complicated structure than other structures may be one of the reasons for the errors
found.
Based on the interpretation of geometric structures of HCP, BCC and FCC, radius ratios
were calculated. Using this ratio, the maximum radius and minimum radius were found.
According to the obtained datas, the FCC and HCP values were similar and greater than the
BCC value. The radius obtained in the triangular form of the BCC structure was the smallest
radius among others.
To make more accurate calculations, some arrangements can be made on the system.
One of these arrangements could be to make the structure by using small balls and rods to see
the planes more clearly.

7
REFERENCES
[1] Chemistry LibreTexts, Closest Packed Structures
Last updated: Aug 22, 2020

[2] The Science and Engineering of Materials, Sixth Edition, Pages 82-83.
Donald R. Askeland, Pradeep P. Fulay, Wendelin J. Wright
22.11.2020
[3]https://metalurji.mu.edu.tr/Icerik/metalurji.mu.edu.tr/Sayfa/Plasticity3-
Dislocations.pdf
[4] KMU479 Material Science and Technology II lecture notes, Week 4, Page 23

8
APPENDIX

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Ref number: [4]

16