4.6 Article

New Strategy for Preparation of Yttria Powders with Atypical Morphologies and Their Sintering Behavior

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 16, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma16072854

关键词

electric field; yttria; conventional sintering; spark plasma sintering; morphology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A modified precipitation method was used to prepare yttria powders for the fabrication of yttria ceramics. The precipitation behavior, phase evolution, and shape of the yttria precursor were examined in the presence or absence of an electric field. The results showed that the yttria precursor had the same phase but different morphology when an electric field was applied.
A modified precipitation method was used to prepare yttria powers for the fabrication of yttria ceramics in this study. The precipitation behavior, phase evolution, and shape of the yttria precursor were all examined in the presence or absence of an electric field. The findings demonstrate that the phases of the yttria precursor were Y-2(CO3)(3)center dot 2H(2)O with and without an electric field, while the morphology changed from flake to needle-like under the action of the electric field. After calcining both yttria precursors at 750 degrees C, yttria powders with similar morphologies were obtained and then densified via conventional sintering (CS) and spark plasma sintering (SPS). The densification and thermal shock resistance of the yttria ceramics were investigated. The yttria ceramics sintered using SPS had higher bulk density and thermal shock resistance than the samples sintered using CS. When the sintering process for the ceramics sintered from needle-like yttria powder was switched from CS to SPS, the bulk density increased from 4.44 g.cm(-3) to 5.01 g.cm(-3), while the number of thermal shock tests increased from two to six. The denser samples showed better thermal shock resistance, which may be related to the fracture mechanism shifting from intergranular fracture to transgranular fracture.

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

4.6
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