4.8 Article

Nanostructure and Energetics of Carbon-Rich SiCN Ceramics Derived from Polysilylcarbodiimides: Role of the Nanodomain Interfaces

期刊

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
卷 24, 期 6, 页码 1181-1191

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cm2038238

关键词

polymer-derived ceramics; polysilylcarbodiimide; SiCN; NMR spectroscopy; calorimetry; interface; structure; energetics; nanodomain

资金

  1. Materials World Network: National Science Foundation [NSF MWN-0906070]
  2. Fonds der Chemischen Industrie, Frankfurt (Germany)
  3. Division Of Materials Research
  4. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0907792] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

SiCN polymer-derived ceramics (PDCs) with different carbon contents have been synthesized by pyrolysis of poly(phenylvinylsilylcarbodiimide) and of poly(phenylsilsesquicarbodiimide), and their structure and energetics have been studied using Si-29, C-13, N-15, and H-1 solid state nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and oxide melt solution calorimetry. The structure of these PDCs at lower carbon content (35-40 wt %) and pyrolysis temperatures (800 degrees C) consists primarily of amorphous nanodomains of sp(2) carbon and silicon nitride with an interfacial region characterized by mixed bonding between N, C, and Si atoms that is likely stabilized by the presence of hydrogen. The average size of the carbon domains increases with increasing carbon content, and a continuously connected amorphous carbon matrix is formed in PDCs with 55-60 wt % C. The interfacial silicon-carbon and nitrogen carbon bonds are destroyed with concomitant hydrogen loss upon increasing the pyrolysis temperature to 1100 degrees C. Calorimetry results demonstrate that the mixed bonding between C, N, and Si atoms in the interfacial regions play a key role in the thermodynamic stabilization of these PDC. They become energetically less stable with increasing annealing temperature and concomitant decrease of mixed bonds and hydrogen loss.

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