首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Materials >A Comparison of Microscale Techniques for Determining Fracture Toughness of LiMn2O4 Particles
【2h】

A Comparison of Microscale Techniques for Determining Fracture Toughness of LiMn2O4 Particles

机译:测定LiMn2O4颗粒断裂韧性的微尺度技术的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Accurate estimation of fracture behavior of commercial LiMn2O4 particles is of great importance to predict the performance and lifetime of a battery. The present study compares two different microscale techniques to quantify the fracture toughness of LiMn2O4 particles embedded in an epoxy matrix. The first technique uses focused ion beam (FIB) milled micro pillars that are subsequently tested using the nanoindentation technique. The pillar geometry, critical load at pillar failure, and cohesive FEM simulations are then used to compute the fracture toughness. The second technique relies on the use of atomic force microscopy (AFM) to measure the crack opening displacement (COD) and subsequent application of Irwin’s near field theory to measure the mode-I crack tip toughness of the material. Results show pillar splitting method provides a fracture toughness value of ~0.24 MPa.m1/2, while COD measurements give a crack tip toughness of ~0.81 MPa.m1/2. The comparison of fracture toughness values with the estimated value on the reference LiMn2O4 wafer reveals that micro pillar technique provides measurements that are more reliable than the COD method. The difference is associated with ease of experimental setup, calculation simplicity, and little or no influence of external factors as associated with the COD measurements.
机译:准确估计商用LiMn2O4颗粒的断裂行为对预测电池的性能和寿命非常重要。本研究比较了两种不同的微尺度技术,以量化嵌入环氧树脂基体中的LiMn2O4颗粒的断裂韧性。第一种技术使用聚焦离子束(FIB)研磨的微柱,随后使用纳米压痕技术对其进行测试。然后,使用支柱几何形状,支柱失效时的临界载荷以及内聚有限元模拟来计算断裂韧性。第二种技术依靠使用原子力显微镜(AFM)来测量裂纹开口位移(COD),并随后应用Irwin的近场理论来测量材料的I型裂纹尖端韧性。结果表明,立柱劈裂法提供的断裂韧性值为〜0.24 MPa.m 1/2 ,而COD测量得出的裂纹尖端韧性为〜0.81 MPa.m 1/2 。将断裂韧性值与参考LiMn2O4晶圆上的估计值进行比较后发现,微柱技术提供的测量结果比COD方法更可靠。差异与实验设置的简便性,计算简便性以及与COD测量相关的外部因素的影响很小或没有影响有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号