No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Dislocations in Ceramics
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 July 2020
Extract
Of the four groups of crystal lattice defects, i.e., point defects, dislocations, interfaces and particles, dislocations are often thought to be the least important for ceramic materials. However, they not only give considerable insight into interfaces (they can be thought of as the link between point defects and interfaces), but they are becoming more important as interest grows in epitactic oxide heterostructures.
The present paper provides a review of our current understanding of dislocations in ceramics. To simplify the discussion, we can separate the task into the following sections, namely
Simple oxides (MgO, ZnO etc.)
Simple non-oxides (A1N, GaN, SiC, TiC, etc.)
More complex binary oxides (AI2O3, Fe203, etc.)
Multicomponent oxides and complex non-oxides (spinels, garnets, S13N4)
Interfacial dislocations (misfit, grain boundary, etc.)
The features which are most often associated with ceramic materials are their complex structures and large unit cells. For example in bcc garnets, the smallest Burgers vector for a perfect lattice dislocation is ∼0.8nm long.
- Type
- Microscopy of Ceramics and Minerals
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Microscopy Society of America
References
1. Ostyn, K.M. and Carter, C.B., 41st Annual Meeting EMSA, Phoenix, (1983) 50.Google Scholar
2. Ostyn, K.M. and Carter, C.B., Adv. Ceram. 6 (1983) 44.Google Scholar
3. Mallamaci, M.P., Bentley, J. and Carter, C.B., 51st Ann. Meeting MSA, Cincinnati, (1993) 928.Google Scholar
4. Castaing, J. and Mitchell, T.E., (1997) priv. comm.Google Scholar
5. Kronberg, M.L., Acta Met. 5 (1957) 507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Support through DoE grant # DE-FG02-92ER45645 and the CMS Bernd T. Matthias Scholar Program at Los Alamos National Labs (Terry Mitchell and Don Parkin) is gratefully acknowledged. Matt Johnson and Mike Mallamaci kindly provided the original images.Google Scholar