4.8 Article

Carbonaceous ceramic nanofibrous aerogels for high-temperature thermal superinsulation

期刊

NANO RESEARCH
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 5047-5055

出版社

TSINGHUA UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s12274-022-5063-2

关键词

carbonaceous ceramic aerogels; radiation opacification; thermal insulation; mechanical flexibility; thermal stability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, carbonaceous ceramic nanofibrous aerogels with amorphous carbon embedded in yttrium-stabilized zircon nanofibers were designed and synthesized to achieve high-temperature thermal superinsulating performance and robust thermomechanical stability.
Ultralight ceramic aerogels are attractive thermal superinsulating materials, but display a formidable tradeoff between low and high temperature thermal conductivity (kappa) due to their low-density features. Embedding carbon species as infrared opacifier in ultralight ceramic aerogels can substantially reduce the thermal radiation heat transfer without compromising the ultralow solid conduction. However, the oxidation resistance of embedded carbon species still remains inadequate to prevent thermal etching at high temperatures. Herein, we report a carbonaceous design and synthesis of ceramic nanofibrous aerogels with amorphous carbon embedded in the yttrium-stabilized zircon nanofibers to achieve a high-temperature thermal superinsulating performance with robust thermomechanical stability. The aerogels display one of the lowest kappa of 95 mW.m(-1).K-1 at 1,000 degrees C in air among ultralight material family, as well as robust mechanical flexibility with up to 95% compressive strain, 30% non-linear fracture strain, and 99% bending strain, and high thermal stability with ultralow strength degradation less than 1% after sharp thermal shocks (240 degrees C.s(-1)) and working temperature up to 1,200 degrees C. The combined high-temperature thermal superinsulating and thermomechanical properties offer an attractive material system for robust thermal insulation under extreme conditions.

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

4.8
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