2 Image (SEM) of cross-section of porous alumina with drying times of a 8, b 12 and c 60 min at drying temperature of
180uC
Table 1 Characteristics of alumina samples after sintering at 1550uC for 2 h with drying time of 60 min
Sample Drying temperature, uC Apparent density, g cm23 Strength, MPa Shrinkage, vol.-% Porosity, %
3 Image (SEM) of a cross-section of porous alumina of sample B after sintering at 1550uC for 2 h and b grain structure
of the porous alumina walls
explained that lower drying temperature of the slurry obtained. Microstructure analysis revealed the existence
gave rise to lower foaming capacity, hence reduced pore of 100–500 mm macropores suitable for medical
formation. application.
In order to evaluate the mechanical properties of the
fabricated samples, compressive strength tests were Acknowledgement
conducted. The mechanical properties of a porous
material depend on its porosity and density.14 As the The authors would like to thanks Faculty of Engineering
porosity was decreased from 50?4 to 43?6%, the and Research Management Center, International
compressive strength was remarkably increased from Islamic University Malaysia for their financial support
4?57 to 5?72 MPa, as shown in Table 1. Since a higher during implementing this work.
density usually leads to higher mechanical strength
meanwhile a high porosity will provides a favourable References
biological environment, a balance between the porosity 1. E. Gregorova and W. Pabst: Ceram. Int., 2007, 33, 1385–1388.
and density for a porous body must be established for 2. B. Yoon, W. Choi, H. Kim, J. Kim and Y. Koh: Scr. Mater., 2008,
the specific application.13 58, 537–540.
Figure 3 shows the SEM images of the macro- and 3. K. Prabhakaran, A. Melkeri, N. M. Gokhale and S. C. Sharma:
Ceram. Int., 2007, 33, 77–81.
microstructures of sample B after sintering at 1550uC for 4. O. Lyckfeldt and J. M. F. Ferreira: J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., 1998, 18,
2 h. The macrostructure shows the pores size in the 131–140.
range from 100 to 500 mm. The grains of porous 5. X. Mao, S. Wang and S. Shimai: Ceram. Int., 2008, 34, 107–112.
alumina walls shown irregular and some small particles 6. S. Dhara and P. Bhargava: J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 2003, 86, (10),
1645–1650.
adsorb on the large grains. There is much bonding area
7. A. Berthold, A. Haibel, N. Brandes, L. Kroh, U. Gross, L. Uharek
among grains. It is well known that more bonding area and H. Schubert: J. Mater. Sci., Mater. Med., 2007, 18, 1333–1338.
usually leads to higher strength between particles; 8. X. Mao, S. Shimai and S. Wang: J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., 2008, 28,
consequently the fracture of alumina bodies mainly 217–222.
happens at the particles boundary. 9. P. Sepulveda and J. G. P. Binner: J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., 1999, 19,
2059–2066.
10. I. Garrn, C. Reetz, N. Brandes, L. W. Kroh and H. Schubert:
Conclusions J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., 2004, 24, 579–587.
11. J. M. Aguilar, F. Cordobes, A. Jerez and A. Guerrero: Rheol. Acta,
Porous alumina ceramics were fabricated successfully by 2007, 44, 731–740.
protein foaming–consolidation method using egg yolk 12. P. Sepulveda, F. S. Ortega, M. D. M. Innocentini and V. C.
both as consolidator and foaming agent. The porosities Pandolfelli: J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 2000, 83, (120), 3021–3024.
and compressive strengths of the samples were con- 13. H. R. Ramay and M. Zhang: Biomaterials, 2003, 24, 3293–
3302.
trolled by adjusting the drying temperature of slurry. 14. M. Scheffler and P. Colombo (ed.): ‘Cellular ceramics: structure,
Sintered alumina bodies with compressive strength of manufacturing, properties and applications’, 291–295; 2005,
4?57–572 MPa at porosities of 43?6–50?4% were Weinheim, Wiley-VCH.