Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:41:38.402Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of α-silicon nitride powder processing on surface oxidation kinetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2011

Pu Sen Wang ,
Subhas G. Malghan ,
Stephen M. Hsu  and
T.N. Wittberg
Pu Sen Wang
Affiliation:
Ceramics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
Subhas G. Malghan
Affiliation:
Ceramics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
Stephen M. Hsu
Affiliation:
Ceramics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
T.N. Wittberg
Affiliation:
University of Dayton Research Institute, Dayton, Ohio 45469
Get access

Abstract

The oxidation of two α–Si3N4 powders has been studied using x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and Bremsstrahlung-excited Auger electron spectroscopy (AES). These two powders had comparable specific surface areas but were produced by different methods. The powders were oxidized by heating in air at temperatures between 850° and 1000 °C. The oxide thickness for each heating time and temperature was determined both from the relative O 1s and N 1s peak intensities and from the relative SiO2 and Si3N4 Si KLL peak intensities. In each case, the oxide thickness calculated from the XPS data was systematically higher than those determined from the AES data. This difference may be due to uncertainties in the data analysis procedures. The oxidation of each powder followed a linear rate law for these temperatures. On one of the powders, the XPS data showed evidence of oxynitride formation. Analysis with thermal decomposition mass spectroscopy also showed that much more hydrogen was evolved from this particular powder, particularly at temperatures >700 °C. These differences in bulk impurity levels are believed to be responsible for the differences in the activation energies for oxidation which were measured to be 104 ± 22 kJ/mol and 62 ± 4 kJ/mol for these two powders.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 8 , Issue 12 , December 1993 , pp. 3168 - 3175
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

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

1Wotting, G. and Ziegler, G., Interceram. 2, 32–35 (1986) and 3, 57–60 (1986).Google Scholar
2Lange, F. F., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 67 (2), 83 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Schwier, G., Progress in Nitrogen Ceramics, edited by Riley, F. L. (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Boston, MA, 1983), pp. 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Anon., Advanced Ceramics Materials Technical Report, Ube Industries, 3.6000 (1987).Google Scholar
5Wang, P. S., Hsu, S. M., and Wittberg, T. N., J. Mater. Sci. 26, 1655 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Wang, P. S., Malghan, S. G., Hsu, S. M., and Wittberg, T. N., Surf. Interf. Anal. 18, 159 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Wang, P. S., Hsu, S. M., Malghan, S. G., and Wittberg, T. N., J. Mater. Sci. 26, 3249 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Horton, J. M., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 52, 121 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Tripp, W. C. and Graham, H. C., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 59, 399 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10Certain commercial equipment, instruments, or materials are identified in this paper in order to specify adequately the experimental procedure. Such identification does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor does it imply that the materials or equipment identified are necessarily the best available for the purpose.Google Scholar
11Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P., Teukolsky, S. A., and Vetterling, W. T., Numerical Recipes (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1987), pp. 400, 407–420, 523–528.Google Scholar
12Wagner, CD., in Practical Surface Analysis, edited by Briggs, D. and Seah, M. P. (John Wiley, New York, 1983), Appendix 4.Google Scholar
13Carlson, T. A. and McGuire, G. E., J. Electron Spectrosc. 1, 161 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14Tanuma, S., Powell, C. J., and Penn, D. R., Surf. Interf. Anal. 17, 927 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Powell, C. J., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 3, 1338 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Scholes, S. R., Modern Glass Practice, 7th ed. (CSI Publishing Co., Boston, MA, 1975), p. 387.Google Scholar
17Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, edited by Weast, R. C., 60th ed. (Chemical Rubber, Boca Raton, FL, 1988), p. B-121.Google Scholar
18Scofield, J. H., J. Electron. Spectrosc. 8, 129 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19Katnani, A. D. and Papathomas, K. I., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 5, 1335 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Stein, H. J. and Wegener, H. A. R., J. Electrochem. Soc. 124, 908 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar