Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Additional services and information for Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials Design and
Applications can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://pil.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://pil.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://pil.sagepub.com/content/225/4/266.refs.html
266
INTRODUCTION
0:36Hv Ec
KIc2
where Hv is the Vickers hardness, E the Youngs modulus, c the sonic velocity, and KIc the fracture
267
2 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
Commercially available a-Al2O3 (A-11, Aldrich,
USA), b-SiC (B-1, Ibiden Co, Japan), and MgO
(Haghighatshimi Co, Iran) powders were used in
this study in which the alumina powder has the
purity of 99.6 per cent and average grain size of 3
mm; also, the SiC and MgO powders have average
grain size of 80 and 70 nm, respectively. The processing steps for hot-press sintering method were
outlined in Fig. 1. Six different mixtures of starting
powders Al2O3 and SiC, containing 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10,
and 15 vol% SiC, were mixed with 0, 500, 1000, and
1500 ppm MgO. The mixtures are milled in a milling
machine (Fritsch, Pulverisette 5) with 17 tungsten
carbide grinding balls and the diameter of 2 cm, in
isopropyl alcohol environment at 250 r/min for 3 h.
Milled mixture initially dries in magnetic mixer at
100 C and at last, it dries in an oven at 130 C for
3 h. Since SiC particles are fine and they easily aggregate, it is very important to disperse SiC particles
homogeneously in Al2O3 [18]; therefore, after the
drying process, the prepared mixture was dry milled
for 24 h. Then, the mixture was sieved and analysed
with scanning electron microscope (SEM; Philips,
XL30 at 20 kV) apparatus but the powder size distribution was not measured.
Fig. 1
268
E
Hv
0:5
P
d 1:5
3
Table 1
269
Physical and mechanical properties of nanocomposite with 10 vol% SiC and sintering
duration time of 120 min for different MgO addition amounts at sintering temperature
of 1650 C
MgO amount
(ppm)
Relative
density
(vol%)
Bending
strength
(MPa)
Vickers
hardness
Youngs
modulus
(GPa)
Fracture
toughness,
KIc (MPa m1/2)
Energy
dissipation,
D (1012 s1)
Energy
dissipation
deviation (%)
0
500
1000
1500
98.05
99.13
99.34
99.28
321.6
391.3
377.8
356.4
1650
1930
1880
1850
209.5
307.8
293.2
288.5
3.01
3.23
3.45
3.55
1.07
1.92
1.52
1.38
0
79.4
42.05
28.97
Fig. 2
270
Fig. 4
Fig. 3
1:5L
MN
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
271
of the SiC to 15 vol% Youngs modulus had a significant decrease because of the reduction of density and increase of pores. The Youngs modulus
were decreased with rising of the sintering temperature from 1650 to 1750 C, which shows the
effects of the sintering temperature on the dispersion of the SiC particles and reduction of the
density.
Hardness versus SiC vol% for sintering temperatures from 1600 C to 1750 C was shown in Fig. 7.
As it was seen, sintering temperature 1600 C had
lowest hardness which with addition of SiC had
reduced. Formation of SiC particle lattice and sintering properties quality reduction had decreased the
hardness; so, sintering temperature of 1600 C was
not the proper temperature. For sintering temperature increasing from 1650 to 1750 C, hardness was
decreased because of the grain growth. The grain
growth with increasing temperature was shown in
Fig. 5. Fracture toughness against SiC vol% for
sintering temperatures from 1600 C to 1750 C was
shown in Fig. 8. Because of proper sintering at higher
temperature, toughness was increased with temperature increase. At volume fractions of SiC over 5 vol%
by increasing the amount of SiC particles, a considerable fraction of SiC particles would be trapped at
grain boundaries. Therefore, with the increase of
SiC vol%, toughness has been extremely reduced
because of the thermal expansion mismatch effect
of SiC particles at the boundaries and intersection
of boundaries. Consequently, it would produce tensile residual stress in the material. Fracture toughness
of grain boundaries is usually lower than that
observed within the grains; therefore, addition of
SiC particles would change the fracture mode of
nanocomposite
from
intergranular
to
Fig. 7
272
E
m d T
21 v 2
E
m d T
21 v 2
xx x, z
l
0
Fig. 8
(a)
Fig. 9
1v
21 v cos x2
d
2 2z sin x cos x 2 z 2
(b)
Grain boundary with (a) the tensile residual wedge opening microstress caused by a single
SiC particle placed at boundary intersection and (b) the stress field caused by the thermal
expansion mismatch by SiC particle placed in the middle of the grains
p cos
4
z sin
2
2z sin x cos x 2 z 2
zz x, z
l
0
3v
21 v cos x2
d
2 2z sin x cos x 2 z 2
8
p cos
4
cos x
2 2z sin x cos x 2 z 2
xz x, z
l
0
1v
21 v cos x2
d
2 2z sin x cos x 2 z 2
9
Fig. 11
Fig. 10
Residual stress caused by the thermal expansion mismatch along boundary AB for the SiC
particle placed in the middle of grains
273
274
Table 2
Physical and mechanical properties for different sintering duration times with 10 vol%
SiC and 500 ppm MgO at 1650 C
Sintering
duration
time (min)
Relative
density
(vol%)
Bending
strength
(MPa)
Vickers
hardness
Youngs
modulus
(GPa)
Fracture
toughness
KIc (MPa m1/2)
Energy
dissipation,
D (1012 s1)
Energy
dissipation
deviation (%)
60
90
120
98.82
99.02
99.13
358.3
410.2
391.3
1900
1950
1930
312.1
321.2
307.8
3.19
3.22
3.23
1.98
2.08
1.92
0.03
0.08
0
Table 3
Fig. 12
Mapping of the different locations on the nanocomposite body (dimensions per millimetre)
Location
number of the
measurements
Relative
density
(vol%)
Vickers
hardness
Fracture
toughness,
KIc (MPa m1/2)
Average
grain size
(mm)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
99.559
99.521
99.545
99.523
99.512
99.526
99.553
99.529
99.541
1936
1953
1944
1958
1961
1950
1941
1957
1939
3.281
3.221
3.291
3.212
3.208
3.225
3.275
3.231
3.275
8.11
7.75
8.10
7.71
7.58
7.69
8.12
7.73
8.14
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
more than 500 ppm MgO. However, relative density and fracture toughness have increased continuously with addition of MgO.
The relative density has been increased with addition of MgO, but it has descending characteristic
with addition of SiC particles.
Additions of 10 vol% of SiC and 500 ppm MgO
increased the bending strength of the ceramic
by 55 per cent in comparison to the pure Al2O3
ceramic.
Relative density, fracture toughness, and energy
dissipation criterion had an ascending characteristic with relation to the increase of the sintering
duration time, unlike the hardness, bending
strength, and Youngs modulus which had had
optimum property at sintering duration time of
90 min.
The optimum physical and mechanical properties
attained from the specimen with 10 vol% SiC,
500 ppm MgO at sintering temperature of
1650 C, sintering duration of 90 min, and sintering
pressure of 30 MPa.
From the measurement of properties in different
locations on the nanocomposite ceramic body, it
has been concluded that the area near intersection
of the diagonals of the body (location number 5)
has lower relative density and higher hardness in
comparison to other locations in the ceramic body.
Authors 2011
REFERENCES
1 Niihara, K. and Nakahira, A. Strengthening of oxide
ceramics by SiC and Si3Ni4 dispersion. In Proceedings
of the 3rd International Symposium on Ceramic materials and components for engines 3rd Int Symposium,
Las Vegas, 2730 November 1988, pp. 919926.
2 Niihara, K., Nakahira, A., Sasaki, G., and
Hirabayashi, M. Development of strong Al2O3/SiC
composites. In Proceedings of the 1st MRS
International Meeting on Advanced Materials,
Tokyo, Japan, 23 June 1988, pp. 129134.
3 Niihara, K. New design concept of structural
ceramicsceramic nanocomposites. J. Ceram. Soc.
Jpn, 1991, 99, 974982.
4 Davidge, R. W. Effect of microstructure on the
mechanical properties of ceramics. Fracture mechanics of ceramics, Vol. 2 (Eds R. C. Bradt, D. P.
H. Hasselman, and F. F. Lange), 1973, pp. 447468
(Plenum Press, New York).
5 Wang, H. Z., Gao, L., and Guo, J. K. The effect of nanoscale SiC particles on the microstructure of Al2O3
ceramics. Ceram. Int., 2000, 26, 391396.
275
6 Seong-Min,
Choi.
and
Hideo,
Awaji.
Nanocompositesa new material design concept.
Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater., 2005, 6, 210.
7 Pezzoti, G. and Muller, W. H. Strengthening mechanisms in Al2O3/SiC nanocomposites. Comput.
Mater. Sci., 2001, 22, 155168.
8 Medvedovski, E. Aluminamullite ceramics for structural applications. Ceram. Int, 2006, 32, 369375.
9 Neshpor, V. C., Zaitsev, G. P., Dovgal, E. J., et al.
Armour ceramics ballistic efficiency evaluation. In
Proceedings of the 8th CIMTEC on Ceramics: charting the future (Ed. P. Vincenzini), Florence, Italy, 28
June4 July1994, pp. 23952401 (TechnaS.r.l).
10 Kinsler, L. E., Frey, A. R., Coppens, A. B., and
Sanders, J. V. Fundamentals of acoustics, ed.4, 2000
(John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, USA).
11 Wang, J., Lim, S. Y., Ng, S. C., Chew, C. H., and Gan,
L. M. Dramatic effect of a small amount of MgO
addition on the sintering of Al2O3-5 vol% SIC nanocomposite. Mater. Lett., 1998, 33, 273277.
12 Rittidech, A., Portia, L., and Bongkarn, T. The relationship between microstructure and mechanical
properties of Al2O3MgO ceramics. Mater. Sci.
Engng A, 2006, 438440395398.
13 Takayasu, Ikegami., Nobuo, Iyi., and Isao,
Sakaguchi. Influence of magnesia on sintering
stress of alumina. Ceram. Int., 2010, 36, 11431146.
14 Bennison, S. J. and Harmer, M. P. Grain-growth
kinetics for alumina in the absence of a liquid
phase. J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 1985, 68(1), C-22C-24.
15 Warman, M. O. and Budworth, D. W. Residual gas
effects on the sintering of alumina to theoretical
density in vacuum. Trans. Br. Ceram. Soc., 1967, 66,
265271.
16 Johnson, W. C. and Coble, R. L. A test of the secondphase and impurity-segregation models for MgOenhanced densification of sintered alumina. J. Am.
Ceram. Soc., 1978, 61(34), 110114.
17 Taylor, R. I., Coad, J. P., and Brook, R. J. Grain
boundary segregation in Al2O3. J. Am. Ceram. Soc,
1974, 57(12), 539540.
18 Wang, H. Z., Gao, L., Gui, L. H., and Guo, J. K.
Preparation and properties of intragranular Al2O3SiC nanocomposites. Nanostruct. Mater., 1998,
10(6), 947953.
19 ASTM B311 - 93(2002)el - Test method for density
determination for powder metallurgy (P/M) materials containing less than two percent porosity,
developed by Subcommittee, B09.11, Book of
Standards Volume: 02.05, 2002.
20 ASTM C1161 - 02c (2008) el - Standard test method
for flexural strength of advanced ceramics at ambient temperature, developed by Subcommittee,
C28.01, Book of Standards Volume: 15.01, 2008.
21 ASTM C1327 - 08 - Standard test method for Vickers
indentation hardness of advanced ceramics, developed by Subcommittee, C28.01, Book of Standards
Volume: 15.01, 2008.
22 ASTM C790 - 07el - Standard test method for flexural
properties of unreinforced and reinforced plastics
and electrical insulating materials, developed by
276