4.7 Article

Chemical and Mechanical Consequences of Environmental Barrier Coating Exposure to Calcium-Magnesium-Aluminosilicate

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CERAMIC SOCIETY
卷 94, 期 -, 页码 S178-S185

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-2916.2011.04448.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Science [DE-AC02-06CH11357]
  2. National Science Foundation [DMR-0520513]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology [MAT2007-30141-E]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The success of Si-based ceramics as high-temperature structural materials for gas turbine applications relies on the use of environmental barrier coatings (EBCs) with low silica activity, such as Ba1-xSrxAl2Si2O8 (BSAS), which protect the underlying components from oxidation and corrosion in combustion environments containing water vapor. One of the current challenges concerning EBC lifetime is the effect of sandy deposits of calcium-magnesium-aluminosilicate (CMAS) glass that melt during engine operation and react with the EBC, changing both its composition and stress state. In this work, we study the effect of CMAS exposure at 1300 degrees C on the residual stress state and composition in BSAS-mullite-Si-SiC multilayers. Residual stresses were measured in BSAS multilayers exposed to CMAS for different times using high-energy X-ray diffraction. Their microstructure was studied using a combination of scanning electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy techniques. Our results show that CMAS dissolves the BSAS topcoat preferentially through the grain boundaries, dislodging the grains and changing the residual stress state in the topcoat to a nonuniform and increasingly compressive stress state with increasing exposure time. The presence of CMAS accelerates the hexacelsian-to-celsian phase transformation kinetics in BSAS, which reacts with the glass by a solution-reprecipitation mechanism. Precipitates have crystallographic structures consistent with Ca-doped celsian and Ba-doped anorthite.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据