Sort by:
Publication Type:
Open access:
Publication Date:
Periodicals:
Search results
Online since: October 2006
Authors: Byung Nam Kim, Tohru Suzuki, Yoshio Sakka, Keijiro Hiraga, Koji Morita
Since the discovery
of this ability in a yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia (Y-TZP) [1], superplastic shaping (Fig. 1) and
joining [2] have been tried in ceramic materials.
b a 200μ Fig. 7 Comparison of cavitation damage between (a) ZrO2-MgO⋅Al2O3-Al2O3 [28] deformed to 2500% at 1650 °C and at 10-1 s-1 and (b) ZrO2- Al2O3 [9] deformed to ~550% at 1500 °C and at 10-4 s-1.
References [1] F.
Vol. 1 (1986), p. 259
Forum Vol. 475-479 (2005), p. 2977
b a 200μ Fig. 7 Comparison of cavitation damage between (a) ZrO2-MgO⋅Al2O3-Al2O3 [28] deformed to 2500% at 1650 °C and at 10-1 s-1 and (b) ZrO2- Al2O3 [9] deformed to ~550% at 1500 °C and at 10-4 s-1.
References [1] F.
Vol. 1 (1986), p. 259
Forum Vol. 475-479 (2005), p. 2977
Online since: September 2013
Authors: Dong Bok Lee, Yeon Sang Hwang
The WC and TiC particles were embedded in the Co binder (Fig. 1(a)).
Fig. 1.
The XRD pattern shown in Fig. 4(d) indicates that the oxide scale consisted of CoWO4 (JCPDS No. 72-0479) as the major phase, and WO3 (JCPDS No. 72-1465) [1] and rutile-TiO2 (JCPDS No. 21-1276) as the minor ones.
WC(s) oxidizes to WO3(s), according to the eq. (1), WC(s) + 2 O2(g) = WO3(s)+ CO(g) (1) This results in 183 % weight gain [3], and 254 % volume expansion.
References [1] S.N.
Fig. 1.
The XRD pattern shown in Fig. 4(d) indicates that the oxide scale consisted of CoWO4 (JCPDS No. 72-0479) as the major phase, and WO3 (JCPDS No. 72-1465) [1] and rutile-TiO2 (JCPDS No. 21-1276) as the minor ones.
WC(s) oxidizes to WO3(s), according to the eq. (1), WC(s) + 2 O2(g) = WO3(s)+ CO(g) (1) This results in 183 % weight gain [3], and 254 % volume expansion.
References [1] S.N.
Online since: December 2020
Authors: Haia Aldosari
Raman data were gathered at a spectroscopic resolution of 1.2cm-1.
Tables Table 1.
Thermal degradation temperatures of the of PE/GO, PP/GO,PB/GO and PBC/GO nanocomposites Polymer matrix ID GO% Tonset (ᵒC) T50% (ᵒC) T 95% (ᵒC) PE 0.00 365±3 394±3 502±3 0.25 475±3 488±3 513±3 0.50 475±3 493±3 514±3 1.00 480±3 494±3 517±3 2.00 478±3 493±3 546±3 4.00 474±3 492±3 521±3 PP 0.00 276±3 303±3 344±3 0.25 440±3 472±3 494±3 0.50 452±3 473±3 496±3 1.00 409±3 443±3 481±3 2.00 445±3 470±3 494±3 4.00 453±3 473±3 497±3 PB 0.00 257±3 372±3 463±3 0.25 389±3 439±3 487±3 0.50 456±3 480±3 506±3 1.00 463±3 482±3 482±3 2.00 462±3 484±3 513±3 4.00 418±3 459±3 583±3 PBC 0.00 407±3 441±3 479±3 0.25 447±3 474±3 505±3 0.50 455±3 479±3 507±3 1.00 457±3 478±3 506±3 2.00 458±3 480±3 507±3 4.00 433±3 468±3 507±3 Figures Figure 1.
The DSC parameters of PE and PP and their GO nanocomposites Specimens ID Tc (ᵒC) Tm (ᵒC) ∆Hm J/g ∆T (ᵒC) Xc(%) PE 103±1 124±1 77 21 26 PE/GO.25 104±1 122±1 62 18 21 PE/GO.5 105±1 123±1 61 18 21 PE/GO1 106±1 123±1 65 17 22 PE/GO2 107±1 123±1 68 16 23 PE/GO4 108±1 123±1 69 15 23 PP 119±1 167±1 100 49 26 PP/GO.25 117±1 166±1 73 49 21 PP/GO.5 117±1 167±1 76 50 21 PP/GO1 117±1 167±1 79 50 22 PP/GO2 119±1 166±1 76 47 23 PP/GO4 120±1 168±1 74 48 23 Supplementary Table 4.
The DSC parameters of PB/GO and PBC/GO nanocomposites Specimens ID GO% Tc (ᵒC) Tm (ᵒC) ∆Hm J/g Xc(%) PE PP PE PP PE PP PE PP PB PB 0.00 109±1 115±1 123±1 166±1 15 46 5 22 27 0.25 106±1 116±1 123±1 166±1 23 39 8 19 27 0.50 107±1 118±1 123±1 166±1 29 36 10 14 24 1.00 107±1 117±1 123±1 166±1 26 37 9 18 27 2.00 107±1 118±1 123±1 166±1 27 35 9 17 26 4.00 106±1 117±1 124±1 167±1 23 41 9 20 28 PBC 0.00 106±1 114±1 122±1 164±1 23 33 4 23 27 0.25 107±1 116±1 123±1 166±1 29 43 10 21 31 0.50 105±1 114±1 123±1 166±1 28 38 10 18 28 1.00 106±1 114±1 123±1 165±1 26 40 9 19 28 2.00 108±1 117±1 123±1 166±1 28 36 10 17 27 4.00 106±1 133±1 123±1 166±1 26 35 9 17 26 Supplementary Table 5. the elastic modulus and the tensile strength at break of the of the of PE/GO, PP/GO,PB/GO and PBC/GO nanocomposites Specimens ID Elastic modulus (MPa) Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) PE 38±6 17 ±2 PE/GO.25 32±3 8±5 PE/GO.5 26±7 9 ±6 PE/GO1 25±2 12±4 PE/GO2 34±1 14 ±7 PE/GO4 43±5 16 ±10 PP 880±50 34±1 PP/GO.25 29±1 7±1 PP
Tables Table 1.
Thermal degradation temperatures of the of PE/GO, PP/GO,PB/GO and PBC/GO nanocomposites Polymer matrix ID GO% Tonset (ᵒC) T50% (ᵒC) T 95% (ᵒC) PE 0.00 365±3 394±3 502±3 0.25 475±3 488±3 513±3 0.50 475±3 493±3 514±3 1.00 480±3 494±3 517±3 2.00 478±3 493±3 546±3 4.00 474±3 492±3 521±3 PP 0.00 276±3 303±3 344±3 0.25 440±3 472±3 494±3 0.50 452±3 473±3 496±3 1.00 409±3 443±3 481±3 2.00 445±3 470±3 494±3 4.00 453±3 473±3 497±3 PB 0.00 257±3 372±3 463±3 0.25 389±3 439±3 487±3 0.50 456±3 480±3 506±3 1.00 463±3 482±3 482±3 2.00 462±3 484±3 513±3 4.00 418±3 459±3 583±3 PBC 0.00 407±3 441±3 479±3 0.25 447±3 474±3 505±3 0.50 455±3 479±3 507±3 1.00 457±3 478±3 506±3 2.00 458±3 480±3 507±3 4.00 433±3 468±3 507±3 Figures Figure 1.
The DSC parameters of PE and PP and their GO nanocomposites Specimens ID Tc (ᵒC) Tm (ᵒC) ∆Hm J/g ∆T (ᵒC) Xc(%) PE 103±1 124±1 77 21 26 PE/GO.25 104±1 122±1 62 18 21 PE/GO.5 105±1 123±1 61 18 21 PE/GO1 106±1 123±1 65 17 22 PE/GO2 107±1 123±1 68 16 23 PE/GO4 108±1 123±1 69 15 23 PP 119±1 167±1 100 49 26 PP/GO.25 117±1 166±1 73 49 21 PP/GO.5 117±1 167±1 76 50 21 PP/GO1 117±1 167±1 79 50 22 PP/GO2 119±1 166±1 76 47 23 PP/GO4 120±1 168±1 74 48 23 Supplementary Table 4.
The DSC parameters of PB/GO and PBC/GO nanocomposites Specimens ID GO% Tc (ᵒC) Tm (ᵒC) ∆Hm J/g Xc(%) PE PP PE PP PE PP PE PP PB PB 0.00 109±1 115±1 123±1 166±1 15 46 5 22 27 0.25 106±1 116±1 123±1 166±1 23 39 8 19 27 0.50 107±1 118±1 123±1 166±1 29 36 10 14 24 1.00 107±1 117±1 123±1 166±1 26 37 9 18 27 2.00 107±1 118±1 123±1 166±1 27 35 9 17 26 4.00 106±1 117±1 124±1 167±1 23 41 9 20 28 PBC 0.00 106±1 114±1 122±1 164±1 23 33 4 23 27 0.25 107±1 116±1 123±1 166±1 29 43 10 21 31 0.50 105±1 114±1 123±1 166±1 28 38 10 18 28 1.00 106±1 114±1 123±1 165±1 26 40 9 19 28 2.00 108±1 117±1 123±1 166±1 28 36 10 17 27 4.00 106±1 133±1 123±1 166±1 26 35 9 17 26 Supplementary Table 5. the elastic modulus and the tensile strength at break of the of the of PE/GO, PP/GO,PB/GO and PBC/GO nanocomposites Specimens ID Elastic modulus (MPa) Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) PE 38±6 17 ±2 PE/GO.25 32±3 8±5 PE/GO.5 26±7 9 ±6 PE/GO1 25±2 12±4 PE/GO2 34±1 14 ±7 PE/GO4 43±5 16 ±10 PP 880±50 34±1 PP/GO.25 29±1 7±1 PP
Online since: February 2015
Authors: I. Malico, P.J.S.A. Ferreira de Sousa
The equation for conservation of mass reads:
, (1)
in which u the velocity vector.
To numerically solve Eq. 1 through 3, the conservation equations are spatially discretized on a uniform Cartesian staggered mesh by finite differences (see Fig. 1).
References [1] S.
Peskin, The immersed boundary method, Acta Numerica 11 (2002) 479-517
Heat Mass Transfer 58 (2013) 471-479
To numerically solve Eq. 1 through 3, the conservation equations are spatially discretized on a uniform Cartesian staggered mesh by finite differences (see Fig. 1).
References [1] S.
Peskin, The immersed boundary method, Acta Numerica 11 (2002) 479-517
Heat Mass Transfer 58 (2013) 471-479
Online since: October 2023
Authors: Mohd Amirul B. Mohd Snin, Nuratikah Ahmad Nordin, Noor Nabila Aznan, Nurulfatin Aqilah Mohd Yazid, Izwan B. Johari
Figure 1 Shredded PLFG
2.1.5 Coated expanded polystyrene beads
CEPS beads used in this study was Poly-A (see Figure 2).
The total number of samples for each type of test is shown in Table 1.
Table 2 Mix proportion of hollow concrete blocks for all samples Mix Batched Quantity OPC (kg) Water (Litre) River Sand (kg) Silica fume (kg) Coated expanded beads (kg) Powder free latex glove (kg) Replacement percentage (%) Control samples 1 1 6 0 0 0 0 SF samples 0.95 1 6 0.05 0 0 5% CEPS samples 1 0.5 5.1 0 0.9 0 15% PFLG samples 1 1 5.8 0 0 0.2 3.3% 3.3 Mixing, Casting and Curing Process The mixing process begins by mixing the dry ingredients - sand, silica fume/ coated expanded polystyrene beads/ powder free latex glove and cement in the concrete mixer for 2 minutes until it achieves homogeneous mix.
References [1] ASTM C642-13, 2013.
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 58(7), 479-481. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.58.7.479 [30] Rivas-Vázquez, L.
The total number of samples for each type of test is shown in Table 1.
Table 2 Mix proportion of hollow concrete blocks for all samples Mix Batched Quantity OPC (kg) Water (Litre) River Sand (kg) Silica fume (kg) Coated expanded beads (kg) Powder free latex glove (kg) Replacement percentage (%) Control samples 1 1 6 0 0 0 0 SF samples 0.95 1 6 0.05 0 0 5% CEPS samples 1 0.5 5.1 0 0.9 0 15% PFLG samples 1 1 5.8 0 0 0.2 3.3% 3.3 Mixing, Casting and Curing Process The mixing process begins by mixing the dry ingredients - sand, silica fume/ coated expanded polystyrene beads/ powder free latex glove and cement in the concrete mixer for 2 minutes until it achieves homogeneous mix.
References [1] ASTM C642-13, 2013.
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 58(7), 479-481. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.58.7.479 [30] Rivas-Vázquez, L.
The Development of Interphase Precipitated Nanometre-Sized Carbides in the Advanced Low-Alloy Steels
Online since: July 2013
Authors: Jer Ren Yang, H.W. Yen, C.Y. Chen, C.Y. Huang
It is worth noting that there were several other preferred sheet planes around {2 1 0}α, {2 1 1}α , and {1 1 1}α, which can occur either at the high temperatures (720 and 700℃) or at the low temperatures (680, 650 and 630℃).
and ; and ; and [1 0 1]MX∥[1 0 0]ferrite.
The sheet planes are oriented close to (2 1 1)α , (1 1 1)α , and (2 1 0)α as shown in Fig. 3, and the possible slip planes can be {1 1 0}α , {1 1 2}α , and {1 2 3}α .
Summary 1.
References [1] A.T.
and ; and ; and [1 0 1]MX∥[1 0 0]ferrite.
The sheet planes are oriented close to (2 1 1)α , (1 1 1)α , and (2 1 0)α as shown in Fig. 3, and the possible slip planes can be {1 1 0}α , {1 1 2}α , and {1 2 3}α .
Summary 1.
References [1] A.T.
Online since: February 2015
Authors: Balazs Fekete, Peter Bereczki, Peter Trampus
The nominal chemical compositions and mechanical properties are given in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively.
In these conditions, fatigue damage is generally caused by plastic strain, and can be described by the Coffin-Manson law [1], shown by the power law relation in Eq. 1:
Table 4 Coffin Manson parameters of the materials Material c 15H2MFA 1,0479 -0,7375 08H18N10T 0,2243 -0,4290 a.
Acknowledgement The publication is supported by the TÁMOP-4.2.2.A-11/1/KONV-2012-0027 project.
References [1] L.
In these conditions, fatigue damage is generally caused by plastic strain, and can be described by the Coffin-Manson law [1], shown by the power law relation in Eq. 1:
Table 4 Coffin Manson parameters of the materials Material c 15H2MFA 1,0479 -0,7375 08H18N10T 0,2243 -0,4290 a.
Acknowledgement The publication is supported by the TÁMOP-4.2.2.A-11/1/KONV-2012-0027 project.
References [1] L.
Online since: May 2016
Authors: Bok Ki Min, Supakorn Pukird, Rinnatha Vongwatthaporn, Pitchanunt Chaiyo, Seong Jun Kim, Ki Seok An, Ladarat Kanlayavisut, Supon Sumran
The FESEM images on Fig. 1 show crystalline films of prepared product on the first substrate.
(b) (a) Fig.1 SEM images of crystalline MoO3 microfilms (a), and at higher magnification (b).
The operating of Raman spectroscopy of MoO3 nanorods-like clusters showed principal peaks of 992.4, 818.7, 666.4, 479.0, 336.6 and 284.5 cm-1, respectively and corresponding with previous papers [9, 11-12].
References [1] J.
Laux, Energy efficiency in nanoscale synthesis using nanosecond plasmas, scientific report 3 (2013) 1-7:1221, DOI: 10.1038/srep01221
(b) (a) Fig.1 SEM images of crystalline MoO3 microfilms (a), and at higher magnification (b).
The operating of Raman spectroscopy of MoO3 nanorods-like clusters showed principal peaks of 992.4, 818.7, 666.4, 479.0, 336.6 and 284.5 cm-1, respectively and corresponding with previous papers [9, 11-12].
References [1] J.
Laux, Energy efficiency in nanoscale synthesis using nanosecond plasmas, scientific report 3 (2013) 1-7:1221, DOI: 10.1038/srep01221
Online since: September 2024
Authors: Viktoriya Pasternak, Artem Ruban, Gennady Ivanov, Oleksandr Zemlianskyi
Figure 1 shows the heterogeneous structure of aluminum powders PA-1.
Fig. 1.
Table 1.
References [1] Xin.
In Materials Science Forum. 1038, pp. 468–479
Fig. 1.
Table 1.
References [1] Xin.
In Materials Science Forum. 1038, pp. 468–479
Online since: May 2007
Authors: Yo Kojima, Shigeharu Kamado
in addition to the automobile parts [1-3].
In this paper I introduce our research results on applications of (1) severe working process to AZ61(Mg-6%Al-1%Zn) alloy, (2) hot rolling to Mg alloys containing more than 3.5%Al, (3) hot extrusion to AZ91(Mg-9%Al-1%Zn) alloy in order to satisfy above-mentioned demands. 500nm Mg17Al12 : 50～100nm Average grain size: 0.5 Average grain size: 0.5μμmm Fig.3 TEM images of the specimen ECAE-processed at 175°C.
Such a microstructural change from the early stage of the deformation may lead to grain boundary sliding, resulting in high elongation at high temperatures. 1.8 2.0 1.4 1.0 0.8 0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4 2.02.53.03.54.04.5 r Δr r Δr 1.6 1.2 0.6 0.4 0.2 Extracted direction (°) 04 59 0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.5 2.5 3.0 Rankford Value, Rankford Value, rr r = εw/εtr r = = εεww//εεtt 2.0Al-0.7Zn 2.5Al-0.8Zn 3.0Al-1.0Zn 3.5Al-1.2Zn 4.0Al-1.3Zn 4.5Al-1.5Zn Al content (mass%) IsotropicIsotropic Δr r Fig. 10 Lankford values (r- value) of each alloy (top) and changes in average r value and Δr with Al content of the investigated alloys tensile-tested at 498K under a strain rate of 1×10-3 s-1.
References [1] Y.
Forum, Vols. 475-479 (2004), p.469 [17] M.
In this paper I introduce our research results on applications of (1) severe working process to AZ61(Mg-6%Al-1%Zn) alloy, (2) hot rolling to Mg alloys containing more than 3.5%Al, (3) hot extrusion to AZ91(Mg-9%Al-1%Zn) alloy in order to satisfy above-mentioned demands. 500nm Mg17Al12 : 50～100nm Average grain size: 0.5 Average grain size: 0.5μμmm Fig.3 TEM images of the specimen ECAE-processed at 175°C.
Such a microstructural change from the early stage of the deformation may lead to grain boundary sliding, resulting in high elongation at high temperatures. 1.8 2.0 1.4 1.0 0.8 0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4 2.02.53.03.54.04.5 r Δr r Δr 1.6 1.2 0.6 0.4 0.2 Extracted direction (°) 04 59 0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.5 2.5 3.0 Rankford Value, Rankford Value, rr r = εw/εtr r = = εεww//εεtt 2.0Al-0.7Zn 2.5Al-0.8Zn 3.0Al-1.0Zn 3.5Al-1.2Zn 4.0Al-1.3Zn 4.5Al-1.5Zn Al content (mass%) IsotropicIsotropic Δr r Fig. 10 Lankford values (r- value) of each alloy (top) and changes in average r value and Δr with Al content of the investigated alloys tensile-tested at 498K under a strain rate of 1×10-3 s-1.
References [1] Y.
Forum, Vols. 475-479 (2004), p.469 [17] M.