4.7 Article

Dependence of residual thermal stress in cermets on the sintering technique

期刊

CERAMICS INTERNATIONAL
卷 49, 期 7, 页码 11464-11473

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.11.345

关键词

Cermet; Sintering technique; Stress accumulation; Phase transformation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of representative sintering techniques on the residual thermal stress (RTS) in WC-Co composites were investigated. The processing parameters of spark plasma sintering (SPS) and sinter-hot isostatic pressing (Sinter-HIP) were used to quantify RTS and its mechanisms. The results showed that the WC phase had compressive stress and the Co phase had tensile stress during cooling. The RTS was more concentrated at the acute dihedral angles of WC/Co interfaces in SPSed cermets.
The effects of representative sintering techniques on the residual thermal stress (RTS) in the as-prepared cermets were investigated using the WC-Co composites as an example. The real processing parameters of the spark plasma sintering (SPS) and sinter-hot isostatic pressing (Sinter-HIP) techniques were introduced to quantify RTS and its mechanisms. The real microstructures of cermets were used in the models for evaluation of RTS distributions in different phases. The macro-mesoscale coupled calculations indicated that during the cooling of both the SPS and Sinter-HIP processes, the WC phase of the sintered cermets has a state of compressive stress, while Co phase has a tensile stress state. The internal stress magnitude of both phases increases linearly with the decrease of temperature. There are larger temperature and displacement fields in the SPSed cermets compared to those prepared by Sinter-HIP. The stress accumulation in the SPS process is faster than that in the Sinter-HIP by 30%. The RTS in the SPSed cermets is highly concentrated at the acute dihedral angles of WC/Co interfaces, which tends to promote the face-centred cubic (fcc) to hexagonal close-packed (hcp) martensitic transformation of the Co phase.

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