We present a small database of adhesion energies for Al/ceramic interfaces calculated using density functional methods. In total, 26 distinct interface geometries were examined, in which the ceramic component was varied amongst carbides (WC, VC), nitrides (VN, CrN, TiN), and oxides (α-Al₂O₃), while including variations in interfacial stacking sequence and ceramic termination (polar and nonpolar). We find that adhesion is smallest (largest) for those interfaces constructed from non-polar (polar) surfaces, regardless of ceramic component. Since the interfacial free energies of all interfaces are relatively small, we examine the extent to which adhesion can be described solely by contributions from the surface energies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Siegel et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: