Densification and Phase Transformation in Multi-Layered Graded Si3N4–TiN Components Produced by Field-Assisted Sintering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The structural and/or functional design of multiphase ceramics, along with their processing, are timely research topics in the area of field-assisted sintering techniques, such as spark plasma sintering, especially for systems containing both electrically insulating and conductive phases. In the present study, spark plasma sintering of Si3N4–TiN composites was investigated by changing the TiN particle size and electrical current waveform. Their combined effects on both the densification behavior and α-to-β phase conversion of the Si3N4 matrix was studied and compared by means of a thermodynamic approach and dilatometric measurements. Through the control of TiN phase characteristics and heating mode, double-layered Si3N4-based components were also prepared using a one-step spark plasma sintering process, which was compared with conventional hot-pressing. It was shown that the size of the conductive TiN phase has a significant influence on the particle rearrangement, with the formation of a liquid phase, and the solution–diffusion–precipitation process, through the field-induced local heating and electrowetting mechanisms. Moreover, the contribution of current pulsing to the densification and α-to-β conversion of the layered Si3N4-based components was mostly dependent upon the particle size distribution and content of the TiN phase, indicating that the electric-field effect is dependent upon current path.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".