The composition, structure and properties of four different glassy carbons

Thomas B. Shiell; Sherman Wong; Wenjie Yang; Christopher A. Tanner; Bianca Haberl; Robert G. Elliman; David R. McKenzie; Dougal G. McCulloch; Jodie E. Bradby

doi:10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119561

The composition, structure and properties of four different glassy carbons

Thomas B. Shiell, Sherman Wong, Wenjie Yang, Christopher A. Tanner, Bianca Haberl, Robert G. Elliman, David R. McKenzie, Dougal G. McCulloch, Jodie E. Bradby

High Pressure

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

21 Scopus citations

Abstract

Glassy carbon (GC) is a class of disordered carbon materials that is known to be superelastic and non-graphitizing up to 3000 °C. The maximum heat treatment temperature is often used as a proxy to denote structure and physical properties. GC synthesised at low temperatures (~1000 °C) is often classified as Type I GC which has advantages of higher elastic modulus, resistance to oxidation, and lower permeability to gases. Type II GC is synthesised at higher temperatures (>2000 °C), has fewer impurities, is more electrically conductive, and is rated to a higher service temperature. Here Type I and II GC samples sourced from two suppliers are investigated using Rutherford backscattering spectrometry and elastic recoil detection analysis for composition, Raman spectroscopy, transmission electron microscope imaging, X-ray and neutron diffraction for structure determination, nanoindentation for mechanical properties, and Van der Pauw measurements for resistivity. The results show that the broad classifications of Type I or Type II do not correlate with the physical properties of the samples. We conclude that the quoted maximum heat treatment temperature alone is not sufficient to specify the properties of GC and that a careful microstructural examination of the material should be used to inform materials selection.

Original language	English
Article number	119561
Journal	Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids
Volume	522
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119561
State	Published - Oct 15 2019

Funding

JEB and DGM acknowledge funding under the ARC Discovery Project scheme ( DP140102331 ). DRM and DGM acknowledge funding under the ARC Discovery Project scheme ( DP170102087 ). BH acknowledges funding through the ORNL Neutron Scattering Facilities , DOE Office of Science User Facilities operated by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory . The XRD portions of this work were performed at HPCAT (Sector 16), Advanced Photon Source (APS), Argonne National Laboratory. HPCAT operations are supported by DOE-NNSA under Award No. DE-NA0001974 , with partial instrumentation funding by NSF . The Advanced Photon Source is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science User Facility operated for the DOE Office of Science by Argonne National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357 . The authors gratefully acknowledge J. S. Williams for useful discussions regarding RBS data interpretation, J. Wong-Leung and S. Q. Lim for their advice and technical assistance in carrying out the resistivity measurements, J. J. Molaison for technical assistance in carrying out the neutron diffraction experiments, and M. G. Tucker for his guidance and expertise regarding the generation of radial distribution functions from neutron scattering data using StoG. The authors acknowledge the facilities and the scientific and technical assistance provided by AFAiiR, a node of the NCRIS Heavy-Ion Capability at The Australian National University and the Australian Microscopy & Microanalysis Research Facility at the RMIT Microscopy & Microanalysis Facility at RMIT University. JEB and DGM acknowledge funding under the ARC Discovery Project scheme (DP140102331). DRM and DGM acknowledge funding under the ARC Discovery Project scheme (DP170102087). BH acknowledges funding through the ORNL Neutron Scattering Facilities, DOE Office of Science User Facilities operated by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The XRD portions of this work were performed at HPCAT (Sector 16), Advanced Photon Source (APS), Argonne National Laboratory. HPCAT operations are supported by DOE-NNSA under Award No. DE-NA0001974, with partial instrumentation funding by NSF. The Advanced Photon Source is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science User Facility operated for the DOE Office of Science by Argonne National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. The neutron diffraction of this work was performed at the SNAP beamline and used resources at the Spallation Neutron Source, a DOE Office of Science User Facility operated by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Notice of Copyright: This manuscript has been authored by UT-Battelle, LLC under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. The Department of Energy will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan.

Funders	Funder number
DOE Office of Science
DOE-NNSA	DE-NA0001974
United States Government
National Science Foundation
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Science	DE-AC05-00OR22725, DE-AC02-06CH11357
Argonne National Laboratory
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Australian Research Council	DP140102331, DP170102087
RMIT University

Keywords

Composition
Diffraction
Electron microscopy
Glassy carbon
Nanoindentation
Raman spectroscopy

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119561

Cite this

@article{88403bfb0fcc418484aa4b409587aeba,

title = "The composition, structure and properties of four different glassy carbons",

abstract = "Glassy carbon (GC) is a class of disordered carbon materials that is known to be superelastic and non-graphitizing up to 3000 °C. The maximum heat treatment temperature is often used as a proxy to denote structure and physical properties. GC synthesised at low temperatures (~1000 °C) is often classified as Type I GC which has advantages of higher elastic modulus, resistance to oxidation, and lower permeability to gases. Type II GC is synthesised at higher temperatures (>2000 °C), has fewer impurities, is more electrically conductive, and is rated to a higher service temperature. Here Type I and II GC samples sourced from two suppliers are investigated using Rutherford backscattering spectrometry and elastic recoil detection analysis for composition, Raman spectroscopy, transmission electron microscope imaging, X-ray and neutron diffraction for structure determination, nanoindentation for mechanical properties, and Van der Pauw measurements for resistivity. The results show that the broad classifications of Type I or Type II do not correlate with the physical properties of the samples. We conclude that the quoted maximum heat treatment temperature alone is not sufficient to specify the properties of GC and that a careful microstructural examination of the material should be used to inform materials selection.",

keywords = "Composition, Diffraction, Electron microscopy, Glassy carbon, Nanoindentation, Raman spectroscopy",

author = "Shiell, {Thomas B.} and Sherman Wong and Wenjie Yang and Tanner, {Christopher A.} and Bianca Haberl and Elliman, {Robert G.} and McKenzie, {David R.} and McCulloch, {Dougal G.} and Bradby, {Jodie E.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Elsevier B.V.",

year = "2019",

month = oct,

day = "15",

doi = "10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119561",

language = "English",

volume = "522",

journal = "Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids",

issn = "0022-3093",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The composition, structure and properties of four different glassy carbons

AU - Shiell, Thomas B.

AU - Wong, Sherman

AU - Yang, Wenjie

AU - Tanner, Christopher A.

AU - Haberl, Bianca

AU - Elliman, Robert G.

AU - McKenzie, David R.

AU - McCulloch, Dougal G.

AU - Bradby, Jodie E.

PY - 2019/10/15

Y1 - 2019/10/15

N2 - Glassy carbon (GC) is a class of disordered carbon materials that is known to be superelastic and non-graphitizing up to 3000 °C. The maximum heat treatment temperature is often used as a proxy to denote structure and physical properties. GC synthesised at low temperatures (~1000 °C) is often classified as Type I GC which has advantages of higher elastic modulus, resistance to oxidation, and lower permeability to gases. Type II GC is synthesised at higher temperatures (>2000 °C), has fewer impurities, is more electrically conductive, and is rated to a higher service temperature. Here Type I and II GC samples sourced from two suppliers are investigated using Rutherford backscattering spectrometry and elastic recoil detection analysis for composition, Raman spectroscopy, transmission electron microscope imaging, X-ray and neutron diffraction for structure determination, nanoindentation for mechanical properties, and Van der Pauw measurements for resistivity. The results show that the broad classifications of Type I or Type II do not correlate with the physical properties of the samples. We conclude that the quoted maximum heat treatment temperature alone is not sufficient to specify the properties of GC and that a careful microstructural examination of the material should be used to inform materials selection.

AB - Glassy carbon (GC) is a class of disordered carbon materials that is known to be superelastic and non-graphitizing up to 3000 °C. The maximum heat treatment temperature is often used as a proxy to denote structure and physical properties. GC synthesised at low temperatures (~1000 °C) is often classified as Type I GC which has advantages of higher elastic modulus, resistance to oxidation, and lower permeability to gases. Type II GC is synthesised at higher temperatures (>2000 °C), has fewer impurities, is more electrically conductive, and is rated to a higher service temperature. Here Type I and II GC samples sourced from two suppliers are investigated using Rutherford backscattering spectrometry and elastic recoil detection analysis for composition, Raman spectroscopy, transmission electron microscope imaging, X-ray and neutron diffraction for structure determination, nanoindentation for mechanical properties, and Van der Pauw measurements for resistivity. The results show that the broad classifications of Type I or Type II do not correlate with the physical properties of the samples. We conclude that the quoted maximum heat treatment temperature alone is not sufficient to specify the properties of GC and that a careful microstructural examination of the material should be used to inform materials selection.

KW - Composition

KW - Diffraction

KW - Electron microscopy

KW - Glassy carbon

KW - Nanoindentation

KW - Raman spectroscopy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069660073&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119561

DO - 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119561

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85069660073

SN - 0022-3093

VL - 522

JO - Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids

JF - Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids

M1 - 119561

ER -

The composition, structure and properties of four different glassy carbons

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this