Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T21:38:00.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Study of copper on graphite with titanium or chromium bond layer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2011

Phillip B. Abel ,
Andras L. Korenyi-Both ,
Frank S. Honecy  and
Stephen V. Pepper
Phillip B. Abel
Affiliation:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44135
Andras L. Korenyi-Both
Affiliation:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44135
Frank S. Honecy
Affiliation:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44135
Stephen V. Pepper
Affiliation:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44135
Get access

Abstract

Improvement of copper to graphite adhesion by thin interfacial films of titanium and chromium was investigated. Graphite fibers and highly oriented pyrolytic graphite flats were sputter-coated first with 10 nm of titanium or chromium and then with 50 nm of copper. After annealing to 970 °C in argon/5%-hydrogen at atmospheric pressure for 5 min, copper without an interfacial bond layer agglomerated into nearly spherical particles, copper with the chromium bond layer agglomerated into particles with a contact angle less than 90°, indicating improvement in adhesion, and copper with the titanium bond layer exhibited a continuous metal film. In the latter case, most of the interfacial titanium was observed to have migrated into the copper and to the free surface, where the titanium reacted with contaminants in the annealing ambient.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , March 1994 , pp. 617 - 624
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

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

1McDanels, D. L. and Diaz, J. O., NASA TM–102328 (1989).Google Scholar
2Vezie, D. L. and Adams, W. W., J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 9, 883–887 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Mortimer, D. A. and Nicholas, M., J. Mater. Sci. 5, 149–155 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Mortimer, D. A. and Nicholas, M., J. Mater. Sci. 8, 640–648 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Nogi, K., Osugi, Y., and Ogino, K., Iron and Steel Institute of Japan, Int. 30 (1), 64–69 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Standing, R. and Nicholas, M., J. Mater. Sci. 13, 1509–1514 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Arthur, J. R. and Cho, A. Y., Surf. Sci. 36, 641–660 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Shinoda, T., Liu, H., Mishima, Y., and Suzuki, T., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 146, 91–104 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Thornel P-100 fibers, Amoco Performance Products, Inc., P.O. Box 849, Greenville, SC 29602.Google Scholar
10Roche, E. J., J. Mater. Sci. 25, 2149–2158 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Model PHI 545 Scanning Auger Microprobe, Perkin-Elmer, Physical Electronics Division, 6509 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344.Google Scholar
12Grade ZYH, graphite monochromators for neutron filter blocks, Union Carbide Coatings Service Corp., P.O. Box 94637, Cleveland, OH 44101.Google Scholar
13Model MRC 8667 deposition system, Materials Research Corporation, Orangeburg, NY 10962.Google Scholar
14Model Dektac 3030, Veeco Instruments Inc., Sloan Technology Division, 602 East Montecito Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93103.Google Scholar
15Model JSM-840A Scanning Electron Microscope with LaB6 filament, Japanese Electron Optics Laboratory (JEOL), and EDAX 9100 with ECON IV windowless detector, retrofitted with Dapple Systems Micro.EDS data acquisition system.Google Scholar
16Model JAMP-30, JEOL small-spot scanning Auger microprobe, operated by Dr. J. Hoenigman, Research Institute, Dayton, OH 45469; also, model PHI 660, Perkin-Elmer, Physical Electronics Division, operated by Dr. W. Jennings, Center for Surface Analysis of Materials, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106.Google Scholar
17Seah, M. P. and Hunt, C. P., Surf. Inter. Anal. 5 (1), 33–37 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Matsunami, N., Yamamura, Y., Itikawa, Y., Itoh, N., Kazumata, Y., Miyagawa, S., Morita, K., Shimizu, R., and Tawara, H., Energy Dependence of the Ion-induced Sputtering Yields of Monatomic Solids, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 31 (1984).Google Scholar
19Betz, G., Surf. Sci. 92 (1), 283–309 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Grade DFP-2, Unocal/Poco Graphite, Inc., 1601 South State Street, Decatur, TX 76234.Google Scholar
21Amax Copper, Inc. OFHC Brand Copper: A Survey of Properties & Applications, pp. 85–88; also, Pawlek, F. and Reichel, K., Z. Metallk. 47, 347 (1956).Google Scholar
22Siu, M. C. I., Carroll, W. L., and Watson, T. W., NASA NBSIR 76–1003 (1976).Google Scholar
23Young, R. M. K., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 135, 19–22 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24Mortensen, A., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 135, 1–11 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25Selected Thermodynamic Values and Phase Diagrams for Copper and Some Binary Alloys, International Copper Research Associates, Inc.Google Scholar