4.7 Article

Unraveling the role of shell thickness and pore size on the mechanical properties of ceramic-based macroporous structures

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CERAMIC SOCIETY
卷 106, 期 2, 页码 1273-1286

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jace.18811

关键词

atomic layer deposition; ceramics; macroporous structures; mechanical metamaterial

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Macroporous structures, especially ceramic-based inverse opal structures, have various technological applications. This study analyzes the mechanical properties and thermal stability of aluminum oxide inverse opal structures with different macropore sizes and shell thicknesses. The results show that the thermal stability increases with increasing shell thickness and macropore size, but it is not related to the mechanical properties.
Macroporous structures are of interest for several technological applications such as catalysis, sensors, filters, membranes, batteries, energy conversion devices, structural colors, and reflective thermal barrier coatings. Ceramic-based inverse opal macroporous structures are especially interesting for high-temperature applications. However, the interrelation between the structural parameters, mechanical properties, and thermal stability of such structures is not yet clarified. In this work, we analyzed the mechanical properties as well as the thermal stability of aluminum oxide inverse opal three-dimensional macroporous structures with different macropore sizes and shell thicknesses produced by atomic layer deposition. Our results show that the structures' thermal stability increased with increasing shell thickness and macropore size, however, their higher stability was not linked to their mechanical properties. To be able to explain this unexpected behavior, finite element modeling simulations were performed, showing that bending stresses became more pronounced with increasing shell thickness, potentially creating additional critical sites for crack initiation and consequent structural failure.

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