Mechanical properties of polymer-derived ceramics modified by active nanoparticles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polymer-derived ceramics (PDCs) address the shaping limitations of traditional ceramic processing techniques and result in near-net-shape manufacturing of ceramics with complex geometries. One of the major limitations of PDCs is their brittleness. In this study, different concentrations of active fillers (silicon nitride and alumina nanoparticles) were added to a preceramic polymer resin (polysilazane, PSZ), which was subsequently thermally cross-linked and pyrolyzed under hydrostatic pressure. Nano/micro indentation measurements show that adding silicon nitride nanoparticles improved the fracture toughness of the PDCs up to ~ 3 times and adding alumina nanoparticles improved the modulus and hardness of the PDCs up to ~ 1.5 and 2.6 times, respectively. The ceramics made with sufficient concentration of active fillers have clearly lower void content than unfilled PSZ, which is attributed to the expected reaction of these nanoparticles with pyrolysis by-products. The ceramics developed in this study show interesting combinations of properties and can easily take different shapes.
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".