4.7 Article

A critical evaluation of barium silicate glass network polymerization

期刊

JOURNAL OF NON-CRYSTALLINE SOLIDS
卷 583, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2022.121477

关键词

Barium silicate; Sanbornite; BaSi2O5; Ba6Si10O26; Ba5Si8O21; Ba2Si3O8; Raman spectroscopy; Si-29 NMR; MD simulations; Connectivity; Glass structure; Tetrahedral network; Polymerization

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2016/18567-5, 2016/15962-0, 2017/06649-0]
  2. FAPESP [2013/07793-6]
  3. CNPq
  4. CAPES
  5. U.S. National Science Foundation [1662288]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The state of polymerization in barium silicate glasses was investigated using experimental techniques and molecular dynamics simulations. The study provided a more accurate structural framework and laid the foundation for future research on structure-property relationships of these glasses.
The state of polymerization in barium silicate glasses (xBaO.(1-x)SiO2 , 0.28 <= x <= 0.45) has been studied by both experiment (Raman, static and MAS Si-29 NMR spectroscopy) and molecular dynamics simulations (VashishtaRahman and Du-Cormack potentials). No a priori assumptions were made about the number of Qn species, specific mean polymerization nor presence or absence of 'free' oxygen species. This allowed us to test the relationships between these structural aspects.& nbsp;The Q(n) site interconversion equilibrium constants K-Q2 and K-Q3 were found to be 0.07 and 0.05 +/- 0.02 from static 29Si NMR, and 0.14 & PLUSMN;0.07 and 0.07 & PLUSMN;0.01 from 29Si MAS NMR, respectively.The Qn species distribution was used to determine the Raman scattering cross-sections for Q(1) , Q(2) and Q(3) as 1.01 +/- 0.15, ~1.1, and 1.14 & PLUSMN;0.04, respectively, although some compositional dependence was found. The Q4 cross-section displays a unique behavior approaching 0 at 38% BaO. This more accurate structural framework paves the way for future studies to establish meaningful structure-property relationships for these glasses.

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