4.7 Article

Carbon fiber reinforced ZrC based ultra-high temperature ceramic matrix composite subjected to laser ablation: Ablation resistance, microstructure and damage mechanism

期刊

CERAMICS INTERNATIONAL
卷 46, 期 10, 页码 14408-14415

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.02.236

关键词

Ceramic-matrix composites (CMCs); Microstructures; Ablation; Reactive melt infiltration

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFC1902401]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province of China [2019JJ50657]
  3. Hunan Key RD Project [2019kj001]
  4. Educational Commission of Hunan Province of China [18C0210]
  5. Double First-Class Scientific Research International Cooperation and Development Project of Changsha University of Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ablation-resistant performance and damage mechanism of carbon fiber reinforced ZrC based ultra-high temperature ceramic matrix composite prepared via alloyed reactive melt infiltration were investigated using a laser ablation testing method under different laser power densities (LPD) and time periods. Ablation damage of the composite was obviously enhanced tested with increasing LPD and reduced with prolonging tested time. A fused ZrO2 protecting layer was in situ formed during ablation testing, significantly improving the composite's ablation-resistant performance. Ablated microstructures of the composites tested with different LPD were characterized and an ablation mechanism going through three distinct periods was proposed. In the first period, the testing temperature is low and ablation damage was thought to be mainly controlled by the oxidation of carbon, ZrC and Zr2Si phases. With the increase of testing temperatures, ablation damage became controlled by evaporating of ZrO2 and SiO2 formed in oxidizing stage. In the final period with the highest testing temperatures, ablation damage became synergistically dominated by repeatedly scouring away and new formation of the fused ZrO2 protecting layer.

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