Study of crystallization, microstructure and mechanical properties of lithium disilicate glass-ceramics as a function of the sintering temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of the present study was to synthesize and characterize lithium disilicate glass-ceramics through the Li2 O-SiO2 system for determining the most satisfactory sintering parameter by evaluating the crystalline composition, microstructure and mechanical properties. Material and methods: The glass-ceramics were prepared from a glass precursor by means of the melting/cooling technique with a composition of 33.33 Li2 O and 66.67 SiO2 (mol.%). The specimens were compressed by the uniaxial pressing technique and three different thermal treatments were used for sintering: 850 °C (Group 1), 900 °C (Group 2), and 950 °C (Group 3), which were determined based on the differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) result. The glass-ceramics were characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Archimedes method, microhardness and biaxial flexural strength analyses. Results: The results regarding XRD predominantly showed lithium disilicate phase for all the heat treatments performed. Moreover, grains with a needle form were more predominantly observed in the SEM images for Group 3, as well as a higher densification and consequently higher mechanical properties. In contrast, Group 1 presented the lowest mechanical properties and densification, as well as the highest porosity. Conclusion: The present study demonstrated how extremely important it is to follow the heat treatment recommended by the manufacturers of ceramics, including time and temperature, which possess direct effects in the crystalline phase formation, as well as in the material’s microstructure and mechanical properties. Keywords Crystallization; Glass-ceramics; Lithium disilicate.
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) | 0.001 | 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".