4.7 Article

Oxidation behavior of different La2O3-content modified SiC ceramic at 1700 °C

期刊

CERAMICS INTERNATIONAL
卷 47, 期 8, 页码 11560-11567

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.12.286

关键词

SiC; La2O3 content; Oxidation; First-principle calculation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [91860203, 51872239, 51602348]
  2. Creative Research Foundation of Science and Technology on Thermostructural Composite Materials Laboratory [614291102010517]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019M660265]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that La2O3-doped SiC ceramic exhibits better anti-oxidation performance at high temperatures, but excessive La2O3 content can lead to a decrease in anti-oxidation performance.
Silicon carbide (SiC) ceramic specimens doped with different contents of La2O3 were prepared by hot pressing process to investigate the influence of La2O3 content on their anti-oxidation performance at 1700 degrees C. The result of the isothermal oxidation test reveals that La2O3-doped SiC ceramic showed better anti-oxidation performance than pure SiC ceramic, and the anti-oxidation performance of La2O3-doped SiC ceramic decreased as the content of La2O3 increased. Mulliken population analysis based on first-principle calculation indicates that the strength of Si-O bond was enhanced by adding a small amount of La dopant (similar to 5 wt%) into SiO2, which is favorable to the thermal stability of the oxide scales. The coexistence of SiO2 and La2Si2O7 under a certain ratio makes the glass layer have proper viscosity to form a compact and smooth protective layer, thus leading to a better anti-oxidation performance at 1700 degrees C. However, the SiC ceramic doped with excessive La2O3 (10-15 wt%) showed poor anti-oxidation performance owing to the defective glass layer and the destruction of SiO2 structure. This work is beneficial to select which La2O3 content is suitable for the anti-oxidation SiC ceramic coating at 1700 degrees C.

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