4.6 Article

A combined CFD modeling and experimental study of pyrolytic carbon deposition

Journal

DIAMOND AND RELATED MATERIALS
Volume 70, Issue -, Pages 173-178

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.diamond.2016.10.010

Keywords

Pyrolytic carbon; Chemical vapor deposition; Computational fluid dynamics; Reaction kinetics

Funding

  1. Ohio Third Frontier (OTF) Advanced Materials Program
  2. NUPTSF Grant [NY214137]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Understanding the chemical reaction mechanism and deposition kinetics is of great importance to guide the production of pyrolytic carbon (PC). A practical approach to mimic the commercial chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process and eventually predict the PC deposition rate is highly desired. In this work, a simplified two-step reaction mechanism was proposed for the CVD of PC, with the first step in the gas phase and the second step on the substrate surface. The kinetic parameters were determined by trial and error using a computational fluid dynamics simulation. The velocity, temperature, and concentration profiles in a cold-wall, forced-flow reactor were modeled based on the geometry and experimentally determined boundary conditions. The computed PC deposition rates for substrate temperatures between 700 and 3000 degrees C were in good accordance with experimental results. Rate limiting steps were observed for both the deposition experiments and simulations. Mass transport -limited and reaction-limited regimes were identified in wide temperature and flow rate ranges. A higher deposition rate was found in a cold-wall reactor compared with those in an insulated reactor or a hot wall reactor. Finally, the PC microstructure was characterized using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, Raman spectroscopy, and X-ray diffraction, demonstrating progressive development of graphitization with increasing deposition temperature. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available