Sinterability of undoped, MgO‐doped, and TiO 2 ‐doped Al 2 O 3 has been examined by applying reported sintering equations. The order of sinterability was MgO‐doped ∼ undoped≪ TiO 2 ‐doped Al 2 O 3 in the initial and intermediate stages of sintering, but a relative sintered density at 1600°C for 1 h occurred in the order undoped < TiO 2 ‐doped < MgO‐doped AI 2 O 3 . The dispersion of thermal grooving angles increased in the order MgO‐doped < undoped < TiO 2 ‐doped Al 2 O 3 , The change of sinterability by the dopants is explained in terms of mobility of mass transfer estimated from a densification rate in the initial‐ and intermediate‐stage sintering and of dispersed driving forces of densification and grain growth qualitatively evaluated from the width of the dispersion of thermal grooving angles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ikegami et al. (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: