4.6 Article

Thermally stable high-entropy oxide glasses with high refractive index

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE
卷 58, 期 31, 页码 12559-12568

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10853-023-08819-3

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The conceptual design of high-entropy materials is expanded to oxide glasses, and a series of LaO3/2-TiO2-NbO5/2-WO3-MOx (M = Mg/Al/Si, and x = 1, 3/2, 2) glasses are successfully synthesized. The transparent glasses possess excellent thermal stability with a glass transition temperature above 73°C. The large temperature gap ΔT, exceeding 60°C and reaching a maximum of 107°C for M = Si, is attributed to the nature of SiO2 as a network former and the complex atomic interactions resulting from high entropy. The M = Al glass exhibits the highest refractive index (n(d) = 2.33) and visible transmittance (74%), maintaining its performance after electron beam irradiation in the IR region, indicating excellent irradiation resistance.
The conceptual design of high-entropy materials is generalized to oxide glasses and a series of LaO3/2-TiO2-NbO5/2-WO3-MOx (M = Mg/Al/Si, and x = 1, 3/2, 2, respectively) glasses were successfully prepared by aerodynamic levitation method. All the transparent glasses are thermally stable, with the glass transition temperature of over 73 & DEG;C. The temperature gap & UDelta;T is all larger than 60 & DEG;C and reaches the maximum of 107 & DEG;C when M = Si. Such high glass-forming ability can be attributed to the nature of the network former SiO2 and the complex interaction between atoms caused by high entropy. The glass M = Al has the highest refractive index (n(d) = 2.33) and visible transmittance (74%), which is almost the same before and after electron beam irradiation in IR region, indicating good irradiation resistance of electron beam for M = Al glass. These results indicate that entropy engineering is a credible strategy for tailoring material properties and the functionality of glass can be increased by regulating the type of M.

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