Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T17:49:45.598Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of rate controlled sintering on microstructure and electrical properties of ZnO doped with bismuth and antimony oxides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Gaurav Agarwal  and
Robert F. Speyer
Gaurav Agarwal
Affiliation:
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332
Robert F. Speyer
Affiliation:
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332
Get access

Abstract

Various rate controlled sintering (RCS) schedules were used on isostatically pressed particulate compacts of ZnO with Bi2O3 and Sb2O3 additives. For low additive content, smaller average grain sizes with more rapid RCS schedules were attributable to thermal schedules which minimized the time at elevated temperatures where grain growth could occur. β–Bi2O3, Zn7Sb2O12, and Zn2Sb3Bi3O14 phases formed during/after sintering. Elevated heat-treatment temperatures favored the formation of Zn7Sb2O12 and additional β–Bi2O3, while Zn2Sb3Bi3O14 was dominant in sintered samples where the RCS schedule did not result in temperatures in excess of 1100 °C. Zn2Sb3Bi3O14 precipitated during sintering, functioning as grain boundary pinning sites which impeded ZnO grain growth. Bismuth and antimony oxide-based liquid facilitated sintering at lower temperatures, which in turn resulted in decreased average grain size. Rapid RCS schedules for samples with low dopant content resulted in lower sintering temperatures, since time was not allowed for Zn2Sb3Bi3O14 precipitation to deplete the liquid phase. For higher dopant contents, liquid phase was adequately plentiful, wherein longer RCS schedules resulted in lower sintering temperatures. Increasing concentration of second phase generally fostered decreased grain size and attenuated the effect of thermal schedule on the microstructure. Electrical resistance and breakdown voltage increased consistent with decreasing ZnO average grain size.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 12 , Issue 9 , September 1997 , pp. 2447 - 2454
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Levinson, L. M. and Philipp, H. R., Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 65 (4), 639–646 (1986).Google Scholar
2.Sukkar, M. H. and Tuller, H. L., in Advances in Ceramics, edited by Yan, M. F. and Heuer, A. H. (The American Ceramic Society, Westerville, OH, 1983), Vol. 7, pp. 71–90.Google Scholar
3.Gupta, T. K., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 73 (7), 1817–1840 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Einzinger, R., in Grain Boundaries in Semiconductors, edited by Leamy, H. J., Pike, G. E., and Seager, C. H. (Elsevier, New York, 1982), pp. 343–355.Google Scholar
5.Amarakoon, V. R. W., private communications, New York State College of Ceramics, Alfred, NY, 1996.Google Scholar
6.Hamano, K., Ri, S., and Nakagawa, Z., Yogyo-Kyokai-Shi 92 (11), 640–647 (1984).Google Scholar
7.Hamano, K., Sayano, A., and Nakagawa, Z., Yogyo-Kyokai-Shi 91 (7), 309–317 (1983).Google Scholar
8.Kim, J., Kimura, T., and Yamaguchi, T., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 72 (8), 1541–1544 (1989).Google Scholar
9.Kim, J., Kimura, T., and Yamaguchi, T., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 72 (8), 1390–1395 (1989).Google Scholar
10.Palanisamy, P. and Asokan, T., Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 67 (10), 1695–1698 (1988).Google Scholar
11.Asokan, T., Iyenger, G. N. K., and Nagabhushna, G. R., Br. Ceram. Trans. J. 86, 190–193 (1987).Google Scholar
12.Amiji, N., Tann, Y., Okuma, H., and Kan, M., Adv. Ceram. Mater. 1 (2), 232–236 (1986).Google Scholar
13.Eda, K., J. Appl. Phys. 56 (8), 2948–2955 (1979).Google Scholar
14.Hingorani, S., Shah, D. O., and Multani, M. S., J. Mater. Res. 10, 461–467 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Haile, S. M., Johnson, D. W., Wiseman, G. W., and Bowen, H. K., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 72 (10), 2004–2008 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Makovic, D., Kolar, D., and Trontelj, M., Mater. Res. Bull. 28 (8), 803–811 (1993).Google Scholar
17.Hennings, D. F. K., Harttung, R., and Reijnen, R. J. L., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 73 (3), 645–648 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Agarwal, G., Speyer, R. F., and Hackenberger, W. S., J. Mater. Res. 11, 671–679 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Palmour, H. III, Huckabee, M. L., and Hare, T. M., in Sintering—New Developments, edited by M. M., Ristic (Plenum Press, New York, 1978), pp. 205–215.Google Scholar
20.Cuzzo, P. and German, R. M., Progress in Powder Metallurgy (Metal Powder Industry Federation, Princeton, NJ, 1986), Vol. 42, pp. 249–266.Google Scholar
21.Hackenberger, W. S. and Speyer, R. F., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 65 (3), 701–706 (1993).Google Scholar
22.Reed, J. S., in Introduction to the Principles of Ceramic Processing (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1986).Google Scholar