Design and Development of Hybrid Al2O3 Based Composites with Toughening and Self-Lubricating Second-Phase Inclusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polycrystalline ceramics, such as alumina (Al2O3), are brittle and they generally wear by fracture mechanism, which limits their potential in tribological applications. In the present work, computational design tools are used to develop hybrid Al2O3 composites reinforced with best combinations of toughening and self-lubricating second-phase particles for cutting tool inserts in dry machining applications. A mean-field homogenization approach and J-integral based fracture toughness models are employed to predict the effective structural properties (such as elastic modulus and fracture toughness) and related to the intrinsic attributes of second- phase inclusions in Al2O3 matrix. Silicon carbide (SiC), boron nitride (cBN and hBN), zirconia (ZrO2), graphite, titanium dioxide (TiO2), and titanium carbide (TiC) were found the most suitable candidates to be added in Al2O3 matrix as individual or hybrid combinations. A series of samples including standalone Al2O3, single inclusion composites (Al2O3/SiC, Al2O3/cBN) and hybrid composites (Al2O3/SiC/cBN, Al2O3/SiC/TiO2 and Al2O3/SiC/graphite) are sintered by Spark Plasma Sintering (SPS) for validation purpose. Properties of the sintered composites are measured and compared with the proposed computational material design. Composition and phase transformation of the sintered samples are studied using X-ray diffraction (XRD) and Raman spectroscopy, while their morphology is studied using Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope (FESEM). The presented nontraditional material design approach is found to significantly reduce experimental time and cost of materials in developing toughened and anti-friction ceramic composites.
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".