Co-Sintering Behaviour of Porous Ni-YSZ Composite SOFC Anodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to successfully co-sinter solid oxide fuel cell components together, the sintering shrinkage of each component must match. However, the sintering behavior of the Ni/YSZ composite anode differs from that of the pure YSZ electrolyte due to constrained sintering associated with its composite structure. For example only a small addition of Ni powder to a YSZ cast tape can dramatically alter its shrinkage response during sintering. Despite the importance of this sintering phenomenon to cell fabrication and microstructural stability, it has not been systematically studied. The goal of the study was to experimentally determine the role nickel oxidation has on constrained sintering of anode structures by examining the sintering behaviour of tape-cast porous Ni/YSZ and NiO/YSZ composite SOFC anode structures. The dimensional changes during sintering were measured using a high temperature dilatometer and results show that the sintering rate, as well as total shrinkage of the anodes, decreased with an increase in the Ni content The oxidation of the nickel metal during processing also causes a significant decrease in sintering shrinkage of the Ni/YSZ structures compared to the NiO/YSZ anode structures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".