2011
DOI: 10.1039/c0ce00523a
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental validation of the modified Avrami model for non-isothermal crystallization conditions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The model describes sigmoidal transformations which are most frequently measured by differential scanning calorimetry or by a mass change determined from X-ray diffraction [16,17]. We have adopted an approach, not previously reported, that employs apatite coherence length as the independent variable as this also appears to be isothermally sigmoidal in its transformation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model describes sigmoidal transformations which are most frequently measured by differential scanning calorimetry or by a mass change determined from X-ray diffraction [16,17]. We have adopted an approach, not previously reported, that employs apatite coherence length as the independent variable as this also appears to be isothermally sigmoidal in its transformation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experimental time dependence of the conductivity shown in ( Figure 3 ) was successfully fitted by a formula derived by the authors from a core-shell model and the Avrami approach (e.g., [ 38 ]). The formula reads [ 37 ]: where , represent the electronic conductivities of the glassy and the nanocrystallized sample (in S/cm), respectively, n is the exponent, related to the dimensionality of the process [ 39 ], K is a constant depending on the crystallization rate (in hr −n ), and t 0 is the time (expressed in hours) when crystallized phase starts to be detectable. The exponent of 2/3 in the above formula is the ratio of the dimensionalities of the shell (2D) and the bulk (3D).…”
Section: Enhancement Of Electrical Conductivity Of Glasses By Their Nanocrystallizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where σ g , σ n represent the electronic conductivities of the glassy and the nanocrystallized sample (in S/cm), respectively, n is the exponent, related to the dimensionality of the process [39], K is a constant depending on the crystallization rate (in hr −n ), and t 0 is the time (expressed in hours) when crystallized phase starts to be detectable. The exponent of 2/3 in the above formula is the ratio of the dimensionalities of the shell (2D) and the bulk (3D).…”
Section: Electronic Conductivity Enhancement In V 2 O 5 -P 2 O 5 Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In any case, the n 1 values decrease with increasing cooling rate indicating that the nucleation mechanism was less complicated at higher cooling rates due to the shorter crystallization time 69 . These n 1 values of neat SCB‐PE at 20, 10 and 5°C min −1 cooling rates suggest a two‐dimensional crystal growth 70 while for lower cooling rates, the n 1 exponent increases indicating that the crystal growth of the polymer chains occurs in three‐dimensions 70 . SCB‐PE/GNPs nanocomposites present slightly higher values of n 1 when the cooling rate is higher than 1°C min −1 compared to neat SCB‐PE.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…SCB‐PE/GNPs nanocomposites present slightly higher values of n 1 when the cooling rate is higher than 1°C min −1 compared to neat SCB‐PE. More specifically, the n 1 exponent of the composites in both cases (SCB‐PE/M5 no BM and SCB‐PE/M5 w BM) indicates a two‐dimensional crystal growth for 20 and 10°C min −1 , while a three‐dimensional crystal growth occurs at lower cooling rates 70 …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%