4.7 Article

Part I: Theoretical predictions of preferential oxidation in refractory high entropy materials

期刊

ACTA MATERIALIA
卷 197, 期 -, 页码 20-27

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2020.07.003

关键词

High temperature oxidation; High entropy alloys; Ultra-high temperature ceramics; High entropy carbides; High entropy borides; Refractory

资金

  1. U.S. Office of Naval Research MURI program [N00014-15-1-2863]
  2. Virginia Space Grant Consortium Graduate Research Fellowship [200009-010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High entropy materials, which include high entropy alloys, carbides, and borides, are a topic of substantial research interest due to the possibility of a large number of new material compositions that could fill gaps in application needs. There is a current need for materials exhibiting high temperature stability, particularly oxidation resistance. A systematic understanding of the oxidation behavior in high entropy materials is therefore required. Prior work notes large differences in the thermodynamic favorability between oxides formed upon oxidation of high entropy materials. This work uses both analytical and computational thermodynamic approaches to investigate and quantify the effects of this large variation and the resulting potential for preferential component oxidation in refractory high entropy materials including group IV-, V- and VI-element based alloys and ceramics. Thermodynamic calculations show that a large tendency towards preferential oxidation is expected in these materials, even for elements whose oxides exhibit a small difference in thermodynamic favorability. The effect is reduced in carbides, compared to their alloy counterparts. Further, preferential oxidation in high entropy refractory materials could result in possible destabilization of the solid solution or formation of other, competing phases, with corresponding changes in bulk material properties. (C) 2020 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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