Sintering Crystalline Solids. II. Experimental Test of Diffusion Models in Powder Compacts

  • R. L. Coble

Abstract

During sintering in alumina powder compacts, the density has been found to increase linearly with the logarithm of time, and the grain size increases with the one-third power of time. Incorporation of the time dependence of grain size increase into late-stage bulk diffusion sintering models (from Part I )[R. L. Coble, J. Appl. Phys., 32, 787 (1961)] leads to corrected models by which a semilogarithmic behavior is predicted. The presence of density gradients in normally fabricated pellets makes impossible the deduction of whether theoretical density will be achieved from the early stages of the course of densification. Diffusion coefficients calculated from the intermediate and later stages of sintering bear order-of-magnitude agreement with those calculated from the initial-stage sintering measurements in alumina. All diffusion coefficients from sintering data are higher than Kingery’s measured diffusion coefficients for oxygen. It is hypothesized that the sintering process must then be controlled by bulk diffusion of aluminum ions while the oxygen transport takes place along the grain boundaries. In controlling the sinterability of alumina to theoretical density, it appears that magnesia does not ‘inhibit’ discontinuous grain growth, but instead increases the sintering rate such that discontinuous growth nuclei do not have time to form.

Keywords

Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Theoretical Density Bulk Diffusion Densification Rate Pore Phase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P. W. Clark, J. H. Cannon, and J. White, Trans. Brit. Ceram. Soc. 52, 1 (1953).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. B. Allison and P. Murray, Acta Met. 2, 487 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. C. Kuczynski, Trans. AIME 185, 169 (1949).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. D. Kingery and M. Berg, J. Appl. Phys. 26, 1205 (1955).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. L. Coble, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 41, 55 (1958).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    B. H. Alexander and R. W. Balluffi, J. Metals 2, 1219 (1950).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. E. Burke, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 40, 80–85 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. L. Coble, J. Appl. Phys. 32, 787 (1961), preceding paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Y. Iida, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 41, 397 (1958).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Belle and B. Lustman, WAPD 184, U.S. Atomic Energy Comm. Research Develop. Rept.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    I. Cutler, in Kinetics of High Temperature Processes, edited by W.D. Kingery (Technology Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1959).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Herring, J. Appl. Phys. 21, 301, 437 (1950).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. K. MacKenzie and R. Shuttleworth, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) 62, 360B, 833 (1949).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Y. Oishi and W. D. Kingery, J. Chem. Phys. 33, 480 (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. F. Laurent and J. Benard, Compt. rend. 241, 1204 (1955).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. L. Coble in Kinetics of High Temperature Processes, edited by W.D. Kingery (Technology Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1959).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. A. Beck, J. C. Kremer, L. J. Demer, and M. L. Holzworth, Trans. AIME 175, 372 (1948).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. E. Burke, Trans. AIME 180, 173 (1949).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. Turnbull, Trans. AIME 191, 661 (1951).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. S. Smith, Trans. AIME 175, 15 (1948).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. L. Coble
    • 1
  1. 1.General Electric Research LaboratorySchenectadyUSA

Personalised recommendations