Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Published simultaneously in Canada.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978) 750-4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762-2974, outside the United States at (317) 572-3993 or fax (317) 572-4002.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available.

ISBN: 978-1-119-32024-1
ISSN: 0196-6219

CONTENTS

Preface

Introduction

Armor Ceramics

A Comparison of Damage in Glass and Ceramic Targets
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental Setup
4. Experimental Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Acknowledgments
7. References
SPS Sintered Silicon Carbide-Boron Carbide Composites
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Acknowledgments
7. References
Effect of Al₂O₃ on the Densification and Microstructure of B₄C
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental Methods
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusion
6. Acknowledgements
7. References
8. Notes
Ballistic Testing of Small 3D-Printed Alumina Disks with the Energy Method
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Energy Method
4. Experimental
5. Ballistic Tests
6. Conclusion
7. Acknowledgement
8. References
The Effect of Powder Oxygen Content on the Morphology of Silicon Carbide Densified via Spark Plasma Sintering
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Acknowledgements
7. References
Low Temperature Fabrication of Reaction Bonded Boron Carbide Composites Infiltrated with Al-Si Alloys
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. References
Chemical Interactions in B₄C/WC Powder Mixtures Heated Under Inert and Oxidizing Atmospheres
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental Procedure
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Acknowledgements
7. References
8. Notes
Simulation of Dwell-to-Penetration Transition for SiC Ceramics Subjected to Impact of Tungsten Long Rods
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Numerical Simulations
4. Discussion and Summary
5. Acknowledgement
6. References
The First Static and Dynamic Analysis of 3-D Printed Sintered Ceramics for Body Armor Applications
1. Abstract
2. Background
3. Traditional Green Manufacturing Process
4. 3-D Printing Green Manufacturing Process
5. Material Analysis
6. Ballistics Experimental Methodology
7. Aluminum Performance Baseline
8. Ceramic Inspection
9. Comparative Performance of Ceramics
10. Conclusion
11. References

Next Generation Bioceramics

In vitro Properties of Ag-Containing Calcium Phosphates
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Acknowledgements
7. References
The Use of Bioceramic Dental Cements – AN Overview
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. ExperimentalS
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusion and Outlook
6. Acknowledgement
7. References
Combined Effects of Silicate, Calcium and Magnsium Ions on Osteoblast-Like Cell Functions
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. References
Bone Regeneration and Angiogenesis in Rat Calvarial Defects Implanted With Strong Porous Bioactive Glass (13-93) Scaffolds Doped With Copper Or Loaded With Bmp2
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental Procedure
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Acknowledgement
7. References
Design, Fabrication and Testing of Bioactive Glass Scaffolds for Structural Bone Repair
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Finite Element Modeling
4. Experimental Procedure
5. Statistical Analysis
6. Results and Discussion
7. Conclusions
8. References

Porous Ceramics

Effect of Membranes in Exhaust Particulate Filtration
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Results I (Substrates)
5. Simulation Work
6. Results II (Filtration Membrane)
7. Conclusions
8. Acknowledgements
9. References
Enforcing of Mechanical Properties of Alumina Foams
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Characterisation
5. Results and Discussion
6. Conclusion
7. Acknowledgements
8. References
3D mapping Of Density and Crack Propagation Through Sintering of Catalyst Tablets by X-ray Tomography
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Experimental
4. Theory
5. Results and Discussion
6. Conclusions
7. Acknowledgements
8. References

Author Index

EULA

List of Illustrations

Chapter 1

Figure 1 Diagrams of our terminology for the various angles associated with cone cracking in normal and oblique impacts and how they are measured. (a) Schematic of a cone crack resulting from an oblique impact and the leading and trailing edge angles as viewed in a plane which contains the shot-line and intersects the apex of the cone crack. The terms leading and trailing edge angles are used when referring to a cone crack, resulting from an oblique impact, as viewed in the plane containing the shot-line as shown here. (b) Schematic of symmetric cone crack with left and right edge angles indicated. This schematic also represents a cone crack resulting from an oblique impact as viewed from a plane perpendicular to the one defined in (a).
Figure 2 Schematic of the impact experiments showing the obliquity measurement.
Figure 3 (a) A section plane containing the shot-line and intersecting the center of the fracture conoid in a boron carbide target impacted at 360 m/s. Notice the cone rack is rotated in the direction of projectile travel. (b) A plane perpendicular to the plane described in (a) which intersects the center of the fracture conoid in a boron carbide target impacted at 360 m/s. In this view the fracture conoid appears symmetric. (c) A section plane containing the shot-line and intersecting the apex of the partial fracture conoid in a fused silica target impacted at 176 m/s. (d) A section perpedicular to the plane shown in (c) intersecting near the apex of the partial fracture conoid in a fused silica target impacted at 176 m/s. In all the images a sphere was placed in the reconstruction of approximately the correct size with an example of the shot-line for the reader’s benefit.
Figure 4 Collected results of normal and oblique sphere impacts on boron carbide. The cone crack angles resulting from oblique impacts agree with our measurements of data published by LaSalvia et al. [5] when the cone angle is plotted versus the normal component of the impact velocity.
Figure 5 Collected results of normal and oblique sphere impacts on fused silica. At higher velocities, the variation in glass sphere’s mechanical properties lead to large variation in the cone angles.
Figure 6 For glass there is also some indication that the cone rotation depends on either the obliquity of impact or the tangential component of the impact velocity or both. (a) A plot of cone rotation versus the tangential component of impact velocity for boron carbide. (b) A plot of cone rotation versus the tangential component of impact velocity for fused silica.

Chapter 2

Figure 1 Crystal structure of SiC⁶
Figure 2 Unit cell of B₄C⁸
Figure 3 SEM micrographs of the sintered composites by SPS using dry mixing method (a) 10%B4C-1.5%C-88.5%SiC, (b) 20%B4C-1.5%C-78.5% SiC,(c) 30%B4C-1.5%C-68.5%SiC, (d) 40%B₄C-1.5%C-58.5%SiC and (e) 50%B₄C-1.5%C-48.5%SiC taken at 2.5 kx magnification.
Figure 4 SEM micrographs of the sintered composites by SPS using wet mixing method (a)10%B₄C-1.5%C-88.5%SiC, (b) 20%B₄C-1.5%C-78.5% SiC,(c) 30%B₄C-1.5%C-68.5% SiC, (d) 40%B₄C-1.5%C-58.5% SiC and (e) 50%B₄C-1.5%C-58.5%SiC taken at 5 kx magnifications

Chapter 3

Figure 1 Density of HCS (black) and HCS-5A (red) specimens.
Figure 2 Densification behavior of the as-received B4C powder for 1900°C and 2000°C hot-pressing temperatures during (a) the ramp and (b) the hold. (c) Determination of the onset temperature for rapid densification.
Figure 3 Densification behavior of the HCS-5A powder for 1800°C, 1900°C and 2000°C hot-pressing temperatures during (a) the ramp and (b) the hold.
Figure 4 Fracture surfaces showing porosity in the HCS samples: (a) 1900°C and (b) 2000°C. Polished surfaces of the HCS samples showing grain morphologies: (c) 1900°C and (d) 2000°C.
Figure 5 Fracture surfaces showing porosity and Al₂O₃ phase in the HCS-5A samples: (a) 1900°C and (b) 2000°C. Polished surfaces of HCS-5A samples showing grain morphologies: (c) 1900°C and (d) 2000°C.

Chapter 4

Figure 1 Schematic representation of the projectile-target interaction of a ceramic tile
Figure 2 Schematic representation of the tapered disk (white) in a confining steel plate.
Figure 3 The process of stereolithography [6].
Figure 4 Two of the 3D printed tapered alumina disks.
Figure 5 Light-microscopy image of the 3D printed alumina
Figure 6 Tapered alumina sample inside a steel confining plate
Figure 7 Corbit 98 plate and steel confined Corbit 98 tapered disk 64 us after impact.
Figure 8 3D printed alumina tapered disk 64 us after impact.

Chapter 5

Figure 1 FESEM images of powder I (left) and powder II (right) at 25000x magnification.
Figure 2 FESEM images of samples made using powder I as-received (A), aged 3 months (B), and heat treated at 600°C (C) at 2500x magnification.
Figure 3 FSD electron images (top) and EBSD maps (bottom) of samples made using powder I as-received (A), aged 3 months (B), and heat treated at 600°C (C) with 6H SiC shown in dark gray, and 4H SiC shown in light gray.
Figure 4 FESEM images of samples made with acid washed and as-received powder II, dry mixed and sintered at 1950°C at 5000x magnification.
Figure 5 FESEM images of samples made with as-received and heat treated powder II, wet mixed and sintered at 1900°C at 5000x magnification.
Figure 6 FESEM images of sample made with heat treated powder II showing difference between edge (A, E) and center (B, C, D) sections. (A) and (B) at 10000x, (C) at 50000x, and (D) and (E) at 2500x magnification. (D) and (E) are etched while the others are not.
Figure 7 EDS element maps from the center region of sample made using heat treated powder II showing oxygen rich secondary phase material between SiC grains.
Figure 8 FSD electron images (top) and EBSD maps (bottom) of samples made using powder II as-received and heat treated at 600°C from different sample locations with 6H SiC shown in dark gray, and 4H SiC shown in light gray.

Chapter 6

Figure 1 SEM image of a typical microstructure of the composite infiltrated with Al-20wt.%Si at 950°C
Figure 2 XRD pattern of B₄C infiltrated with Al-20wt.%Si alloy at 850°C
Figure 3 SEM image of the fractured surface indicating a trans-granular fracture mode
Figure 4 Young modulus and flexural strength of infiltrated B₄C\Al-Si fabricated at 950°C

Chapter 7

Figure 1 Starting powders: (a) B₄C, (b) WC, and (c) B₄C/WC mixture. The bright and dark phases in (c) are WC and B₄C, respectively.
Figure 2 (a) DSC and (b) TGA data for the as-received B₄C powder.
Figure 3 SEM images of the as-received B₄C powder following DSC/TGA under flowing Ar/20O₂ conditions.
Figure 4 (a) DSC and (b) TGA data for the as-received WC powder.
Figure 5 SEM images of the as-received WC powders following DSC/TGA under flowing Ar/20O₂ conditions.
Figure 6 (a) DSC and (b) TGA data for the B₄C/WC powder mixture.
Figure 7 SEM images of B₄C/WC powder mixtures following DSC/TGA experiments under flowing Ar/20O₂ conditions. The bright and dark phases are WO₃ and B₂O₃, respectively.

Chapter 8

Figure 1 Interface defeat at v=1250 m/s without SiC failure.
Figure 2 Surface pressure applying on the surface of the ceramic.
Figure 3 Pressure-dependent strength for SiC ceramics in JH1 model ^[4].
Figure 4 Distribution of σ_e, P, and σ_yield in ceramics at t=0.3μs after impact.
Figure 5 Development of damage in the ceramic.
Figure 6 Damage in the ceramics at t=3.0μs under different lateral prestress.
Figure 7 Damage in the ceramics at t=6.0μs under different lateral prestress.
Figure 8 Stress distribution and damage in the buffered ceramic at t=0μs.
Figure 9 Stress distribution and damage in the buffered ceramic at t=7μs.
Figure 10 Typical distribution of P, σ_e, and σ_yield in ceramics.

Chapter 9

Figure 1 Typical Die Press Assembly.
Figure 2 PSD Technology.
Figure 3 Representative Microstructure of AD-995 (A) and HotEnd Works Alumina (B).
Figure 4 Alumina Tiles before impact
Figure 5 Sketch of Ceramic Composite Samples.
Figure 6 Initial conditions of ceramic composite samples in fixture.
Figure 7 Cross section of a 12.7-mm APM2.
Figure 8 Measurement of Residual Penetration.
Figure 9 Penetration of 12.7mm APM2 into AA6061
Figure 10 Residual Mass of 12.7mm APM2 into AA6061.
Figure 11 Residual Length of 12.7mm APM2 into AA6061.
Figure 12 HotEnd Works Alumina after Impact
Figure 13 Ceramic Performance Map.

Chapter 10

Figure 1 Amounts of (a) Ca, (b) P-related, and (c) Ag ions in Tris-HCl solution after immersion of sintered compacts.
Figure 2 Surface of (a, b) 0.0043AgTCP/HA and (c, d) 0.0214AgTCP sintered compacts (a, c) before and (b, d) after immersion for 15 days in Tris-HCl solution and (e) EDX spectrum of the region enclosed in a square in (d).
Figure 3 Changes in the concentration of viable bacteria with incubation time after exposure to sintered compacts when the initial bacterial concentration was 10⁶ CFU·mL^-1.
Figure 4 Number of viable V79 colonies on sintered compacts.

Chapter 11

Figure 1 General nanostructure in the biomaterial system CASPH [10].
Figure 2 The nanostructure integration at the contact zone between a titanium implant (Ti), and a Ca-aluminate hydrated paste (CAH), High-resolution TEM (bar = 10 nm)
Figure 3 CA-based material in the contact zone to dentine
Figure 4 Clinical digital photograph of maxillary anterior restorations, (right and left lateral and central incisors, cemented by Ceramir^®C&B)
Figure 5 Orthograde filling, tooth 21; condensing with a Gutta-percha pointer (a), just after treatment (b), and at two years control (c), and Retrograde filling, tooth 21 at treatment (d) and at two years control (e)

Chapter 12

Fig. 1 Cell morphology after culturing in the single-conditioned medium, 240Ca, (left) and the tri-conditioned medium, 50Si-240Ca-250Mg, (right). Blue and red indicate nucleus and F-actin, respectively. Bar: 50 βm.

Chapter 13

Fig. 1 (a) Optical image of the four groups of as-fabricated scaffolds used in the present study, prepared by robocasting and composed of (left to right) 13-93 glass doped with 0, 0.4, 0.8 and 2.0 wt. % CuO; (b) SEM image of the top surface of a 13-93 scaffold doped with 0.8 wt. % CuO; (c) SEM image of the surface of a glass filament (0.8 wt. % CuO) after immersion of the scaffold in SBF at 37 °C for 7 days.
Fig. 2 (a) pH of the immersion medium and (b) cumulative amount of Cu ions released from the scaffolds into the immersion medium for scaffolds of 13-93 glass doped with 0, 0.4, 0.8 and 2.0 wt. % CuO as a function of immersion time in SBF.
Fig. 3 (a-c) Transmitted light images of H&E stained sections of rat calvarial defects implanted with scaffolds of 13-93 glass doped with 0, 0.4 and 2.0 wt. % CuO, as fabricated (left) or loaded with BMP2 (right), at 6 weeks postimplantation. N = new bone; O = host bone; G = bioactive glass; arrowheads indicate the edges of host bone. (d) Percent new bone in rat calvarial defects implanted with scaffolds of 13-93 glass doped with 0, 0.4, 0.8 and 2.0 wt. % CuO, as-fabricated or loaded with BMP2, at 6 weeks postimplantation. The amount of new bone is shown as a percentage of the available pore space (area) of the scaffolds. (*significant difference between groups; #significant difference when compared to as-fabricated 13-93 scaffolds; p<0.05).
Fig. 4 (a-c) Transmitted light images of von Kossa stained sections of rat calvarial defects implanted with scaffolds of 13-93 glass doped with 0, 0.4 and 2.0 wt. % CuO, as fabricated (left) or loaded with BMP2 (right), at 6 weeks postimplantation. G = bioactive glass; arrowheads indicate the edges of host bone. (d) Percent total von Kossa positive (vK+) area, determined as a percentage of the total defect area, for rat calvarial defects implanted with the four groups of scaffolds, as-fabricated or loaded with BMP2, at 6 weeks postimplantation. (*significant difference between groups; #significant difference when compared to as-fabricated 13-93 scaffolds; p<0.05).
Fig. 5 (Left: a1 c1) Transmitted light images of PAS stained sections of rat calvarial defects implanted with scaffolds of 13-93 glass doped with 0, 0.4 and 2.0 wt. % CuO at 6 weeks postimplantation. (Right: a2-c2) Magnified images of the boxed areas in the corresponding images on the left. (N = new bone; G = bioactive glass; Arrows indicate some of the blood vessels.) (d) Percent blood vessel area in rat calvarial defects implanted with the four groups of scaffolds at 6 weeks postimplantation. The blood vessel area in the fibrous tissue and in the new bone that infiltrated the as-fabricated scaffolds, and in the new bone that infiltrated the BMP2-loaded scaffolds are shown as a percentage of the total area of the fibrous tissue and new bone, respectively. (*significant difference between groups; #significant difference when compared to 13-93 group; p<0.05)

Chapter 14

Fig. 1 Summary of models analyzed in FEM simulations. The models, with the shape of beams, were composed of alternating layers of long glass filaments (L) and short glass filaments (S) arranged orthogonally along the x and y axes. Cross sections showing the spatial arrangement of the long filaments (without the short filaments) are also shown in the left column. The designations LiSi are used to describe the different distribution of the filaments in the models.
Fig. 2 (a) Three-dimensional and (b) planar view of the four-point loading system used in the FEM simulations. The inner and outer spans were 10 mm and 20 mm, respectively, and the load was applied in a vertical direction (red arrow).
Fig. 3 The magnitude and distribution of the tensile stress in the long filaments of the bottom layers of different models when subjected to the same applied load. The scale on the left gives the maximum principal stress corresponding to specific colors.
Fig. 4 Highest tensile stress in the long filaments in the bottom layer of the models (normalized to the L1S1 model) determined from FEM simulations under an applied load of 100 N. The region of highest stress corresponded to the middle region of the bottom filaments between the inner span.
Fig. 5 SEM images of the cross section perpendicular to the long filaments of as-fabricated 13-93 bioactive glass scaffolds with three different microstructures. Scale bar = 500 μm.
Fig. 6 (a) Measured load at failure and (b) flexural strength of as-fabricated 13-93 bioactive glass scaffolds with the microstructures shown, tested in four-point bending.
Fig. 7 SEM images of the fractured surfaces of the scaffolds with the L3S1 architecture (a-c) and L4S1 architecture (d-f) after testing in four-point bending. The plane (a, d) is approximately perpendicular to the direction of the long filaments. Higher magnification images of selected areas in (a), (d) are shown in (b, c) and (e, f). (Top: the side contacting inner span during the bending test; Bottom: the side contacting outer span; Stars: mirror region; M: mist region; H: hackle region; A: arrest line; arrow: crack origin; arrowheads: cantilever curls.)

Chapter 15

Figure 1 Microstructure of LPS-SiC-filter ceramics with different mean pore size a) 11.2 μm, b) 18.9 μm. SEM images on micrographs: dark: porosity, grey: SiC, white: YAG additive.
Figure 2 Hg-porosimetry curves for both substrate materials.
Figure 3 Test rig for particle loading, pressure drop and filtration efficiency measurements. Left: gas/vacuum supply, particle dispenser and sample holders, right: particle size and concentration measurement (SMPS).
Figure 4 Pressure drop dependent on air volume flow rate for both substrate materials.
Figure 5 Typical pressure drop and filter efficiency curves vs particle loading. Letters a)-d) represent different stages of filtration corresponding to SEM images in figure 6.
Figure 6 Particle loading of substrate samples at different stages of filtration according to figure 5. Detailed explanation see text. SEM images made on broken cross sections of samples near sample surface. Coarse particles: ceramic filter, fine particles: collected lamp black particles.
Figure 7 Pressure drop (left) and filtration efficiency (right) vs particle loading for both substrate materials.
Figure 8 Comparison of cross sections of (a) real microstructure (SEM) and (b) virtual material structure.
Figure 9 Measured/simulated pressure drop vs. particle loading for 5 runs each. Small pictures represent simulated cross sections at different loading stages (black: ceramic, grey: particles).
Figure 10 Left: 3D virtual structure of loaded filter material (ceramic: red, particles: gray), right: virtual path lines of (selected) particles within the structure (filter material and particles erased).
Figure 11 Examples for simulated membranes. Dark gray: substrate, light gray: membrane.
Figure 12 Simulated pressure drop vs particle loading for different membrane configurations from figure 11 using the same substrate material.
Figure 13 Thin ceramic membrane on top of a substrate with 11.2 μm mean pore diameter. SEM image of a cross fractured sample.
Figure 14 Pressure drop and filtration efficiency vs particle loading for filtration membrane on substrate and substrate only samples.

Chapter 16

Figure 1 a) reference alumina microstructure, b) amorphous residual SiO₂ layer on alumina surface, c) strut of 45 ppi foam with wide mullite areas and residual SiO₂ layer mostly in the necks d) mullite crystal formation on 45 ppi foam, e) 60 ppi foam strut with filled pores and mullite layer formation.
Figure 2 a) strut size distribution and b) cell size distribution of uncoated and coated foams determined from μCT-measurements.
Figure 3 XRD spectra of a SiO₂ coated alumina foam sintered at 1700 °C for 3h showing mullite formation.
Figure 4 Compression strength of reference and coated alumina foams with two different SiO₂- contents.

Chapter 17

Figure 1 A picture of the tablet in the green state.
Figure 2 The average width measured by the optical dilatometer during the heating ramp and holding period as a function of a) temperature and b) time. The insert in a) is an image of the tablet with the three regions of interest on which the width is measured.
Figure 3 The relative width (width divided by average width) at three different heights (see insert in Figure 2a) during the heating ramp.
Figure 4 A 2D slice of the 3D tomographic data between two of the seven tablet holes, after sintering at three different temperatures for the same tablet. The gray scale indicates density, where black is low density (pores/cracks/holes) and white is high density (ceramic material).
Figure 5 2D slices of the 3D tomographic data after sintering at three different temperatures for the same tablet close to the perimeter of the tablet at two different locations a) and b). The gray scale indicates density, where black is low density (pores/cracks/holes) and white is high density (ceramic material). The reason for the black cut-off at top right part of the image at 1000°C is that it is outside the depicted volume.

Preface

I had the pleasure of being the lead organizer for the 14th Armor Ceramics Symposium in 2016 at the 40th International Conference on Advanced Ceramics and Composites. I am very grateful for the guidance and support that was provided by Jeff Swab, Andy Wereszczak, and the organizing committee in putting this symposium together. Consistent with the history of this symposium, we strived to create a program that would foster discussion and collaboration between researchers from around the world in academia, government, and industry on various scientific issues associated with the topic of armor ceramics.

The 2016 symposium consisted of approximately 50 invited, contributing, and poster presentations from the international scientific community in the areas of synthesis & processing, manufacturing, materials characterization, testing & evaluation, quasi-static & dynamic behavior, modeling, and application. In addition, because of their importance for the foreseeable future, this symposium also had special focused topic sessions on Glass, Additive Manufacturing, and Ballistic Behavior. Based on feedback from attendees, the 2016 symposium was a success, and the manuscripts contained in these proceedings are from some of the presentations that comprised the 14th edition of the Armor Ceramics Symposium.

On behalf of Jeff Swab and the organizing committee, I would like to thank all of the presenters, authors, session chairs, and manuscript reviewers for their efforts in making this symposium and the associated proceedings a success. I would also especially like to thank Andy Wereszczak, Tim Holmquist, Mike Golt, Steve Kilczewski, Kris Behler, Victoria Blair, and Nitin Daphalapurkar for hosting and chairing the symposium when we were unable to due to remnant effects of Sequestration.

This issue contains the proceedings of the “Next Generation Bioceramics” and “Porous Ceramics: Novel Developments and Applications” symposia of the 40th International Conference and Exposition on Advanced Ceramics and Composites (ICACC’15), which was held from between January 24th and January 29th, 2016 in Daytona Beach, Florida, USA.

A rapidly growing area of ceramic science & engineering involves the development of novel ceramic materials that facilitate the diagnosis and/or treatment of medical conditions. Researchers have recently developed several types of bioinspired and biomimetic ceramics, which imitate many of the attributes of materials that are found in nature. The “Next Generation Bioceramics” symposium addressed many topics associated with processing, characterization, modeling, and applications of ceramics for medical applications. Topics covered by the symposium included processing of advanced bioceramics; bioinspired and biomimetic ceramics; biomineralization; self-assembly of bioceramics; inorganic-organic composite materials; nanostructured bioceramics; mechanical properties of bioceramics; in vitro and in vivo characterization of bioceramics; bioceramics for drug delivery; bioceramics for gene delivery; bioceramics for sensing; and bioceramics for dental applications. This symposium facilitated productive discussions among various groups in the global bioceramics community, including academic researchers, industrial researchers, governmental researchers, and graduate students.

The symposium on Porous Ceramics dealt with innovations in processing methods and synthesis, membranes and high specific surface area ceramics, filters, innovative characterization methods and properties, especially mechanical ones, of porous ceramics. The presenters came from all over the world and the symposium was well attended by members of academia and industry.

Fabrication methods presented included direct foaming, freeze casting, replica and the use of sacrificial fillers, and great attention was devoted to the characterization of porosity and modeling of properties by using advanced Computed Tomography analysis. The experimental reliability of bending tests as well as the statistical analysis of strength data was discussed and examples of important technological applications such as advanced thermal insulation components, filters, membranes and parts for ultrasonic transducers. We are looking forward to the next symposium, in which the new innovations in this exciting field will be presented.

We would like to acknowledge the efforts of the authors and reviewers, without whom this volume would have not been possible. We thank the leadership of the Engineering Ceramics Division of The American Ceramic Society for their tireless efforts. We would also like to recognize Marilyn Stoltz and Greg Geiger of The American Ceramic Society, for their support and tireless efforts without which the success of these symposia would not be possible. We hope that this volume becomes a useful resource for academic and industrial efforts involving armor ceramics, porous ceramics and bioceramic materials. Finally, we hope that this volume facilitates advances in ceramic science & technology and contributes to the leadership of The American Ceramic Society in these emerging areas.

JERRY C. LaSalvia
U.S. Army Research Center Symposium Chair, Armor Ceramics

ROGER NARAYAN
University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University
Symposium Chair, Next Generation Bioceramics

PAOLO COLOMBO
Università di Padova (Italy) and The Pennsylvania State University
Symposium Chair, Porous Ceramics

Introduction

This collected proceedings consists of 104 papers that were submitted and approved for the proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Advanced Ceramics and Composites (ICACC), held January 24–29, 2016 in Daytona Beach, Florida. ICACC is the most prominent international meeting in the area of advanced structural, functional, and nanoscopic ceramics, composites, and other emerging ceramic materials and technologies. This prestigious conference has been organized by the Engineering Ceramics Division (ECD) of The American Ceramic Society (ACerS) since 1977. This year’s meeting continued the tradition and added a few grand celebrations to mark its 40th year.

The 40th ICACC hosted more than 1,100 attendees from 42 countries that gave over 900 presentations. The topics ranged from ceramic nanomaterials to structural reliability of ceramic components, which demonstrated the linkage between materials science developments at the atomic level and macro level structural applications. Papers addressed material, model, and component development and investigated the interrelations between the processing, properties, and microstructure of ceramic materials.

The 2016 conference was organized into the following 17 symposia and 5 Focused Sessions:

Symposium 1	Mechanical Behavior and Performance of Ceramics and Composites
Symposium 2	Advanced Ceramic Coatings for Structural, Environmental, and Functional Applications
Symposium 3	13th International Symposium on Solid Oxide Fuel Cells (SOFC): Materials, Science, and Technology
Symposium 4	Armor Ceramics: Challenges and New Developments
Symposium 5	Next Generation Bioceramics and Biocomposites
Symposium 6	Advanced Materials and Technologies for Direct Thermal Energy Conversion and Rechargeable Energy Storage
Symposium 7	10th International Symposium on Nanostructured Materials: Functional Nanomaterials and Thin Films for Sustainable Energy Harvesting, Environmental and Health Applications
Symposium 8	10th International Symposium on Advanced Processing & Manufacturing Technologies for Structural & Multifunctional Materials and Systems
Symposium 9	Porous Ceramics: Novel Developments and Applications
Symposium 10	Virtual Materials (Computational) Design and Ceramic Genome
Symposium 11	Advanced Materials and Innovative Processing ideas for the Production Root Technology
Symposium 12	Materials for Extreme Environments: Ultrahigh Temperature Ceramics (UHTCs) and Nano-laminated
Symposium 13	Ternary Carbides and Nitrides (MAX Phases) Advanced Materials for Sustainable Nuclear Fission and Fusion Energy
Symposium 14	Crystalline Materials for Electrical, Optical and Medical Applications
Focused Session 1	Geopolymers, Chemically Bonded Ceramics, Eco-friendly and Sustainable Materials
Focused Session 2	Advanced Ceramic Materials and Processing for Photonics and Energy
Focused Session 3	Materials Diagnostics and Structural Health Monitoring of Ceramic Components and Systems
Focused Session 4	Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Focused Session 5	Field Assisted Sintering and Related Phenomena at High Temperatures
Focused Session 6	Hybrid Materials and Processing Technologies
Special Symposium	40th Jubilee Symposium: Engineered Ceramics—Current Status and Future Prospects
Special Symposium	5th Global Young Investigators Forum
Special Symposium	Emerging Technologies Symposium: Carbon Nanostructures and 2D Materials and Composites

The proceedings papers from this conference are published in the below seven issues of the 2016 CESP; Volume 37, Issues 2–7, as listed below.

Mechanical Properties and Performance of Engineering Ceramics and Composites XI, CESP Volume 37, Issue 2 (includes papers from Symposium 1)
Advances in Solid Oxide Fuel Cells and Electronic Ceramics II, CESP Volume 37, Issue 3 (includes papers from Symposia 3 and 14)
Advances in Ceramic Armor, Bioceramics, and Porous Materials, CESP Volume 37, Issue 4 (includes papers from Symposia 4, 5, and 9)
Advanced Processing and Manufacturing Technologies for Nanostructured and Multifunctional Materials III, CESP Volume 37, Issue 5 (includes papers from Symposia 8 and 11 and Focused Sessions 4 and 5)
Ceramic Materials for Energy Applications VI, CESP Volume 37, Issue 6 (includes papers from Symposia 6 and 13 and Focused Session 2)
Developments in Strategic Materials II, CESP Volume 37, Issue 7 (includes papers from Symposia 2, 10, 12, Focused Sessions 1, and the Special Symposia on Carbon).

The organization of the Daytona Beach meeting and the publication of these proceedings were possible thanks to the professional staff of ACerS and the tireless dedication of many ECD members. We would especially like to express our sincere thanks to the symposia organizers, session chairs, presenters and conference attendees, for their efforts and enthusiastic participation in the vibrant and cutting-edge conference.

ACerS and the ECD invite you to attend the 41st International Conference on Advanced Ceramics and Composites (http://www.ceramics.org/icacc2017) January 23-28, 2017 in Daytona Beach, Florida.

To purchase additional CESP issues as well as other ceramic publications, visit the ACerS-Wiley Publications home page at www.wiley.com/go/ceramics.

Manabu Fukushima, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Japan

Andrew Gyekenyesi, Ohio Aerospace Institute/NASA Glenn Research Center, USA

Volume Editors
August 2016

Advance in Ceramic
Armor, Bioceramics, and
Porous Materials

A Collection of Papers Presented at the
40th International Conference on
Advanced Ceramics and Composites
January 24–29, 2016
Daytona Beach, Florida

Preface

Introduction

ARMOR CERAMICS

A Collection of Papers Presented at the40th International Conference onAdvanced Ceramics and Composites January 24–29, 2016 Daytona Beach, Florida

A Collection of Papers Presented at the
40th International Conference on
Advanced Ceramics and Composites
January 24–29, 2016
Daytona Beach, Florida