Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ceramics International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ceramint

Effect of Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive on sintering behavior and

thermal properties of Al2O3 ceramics for thermal storage
Xiaohong Xu, Qiankun Zhang *, Jianfeng Wu, Zhenyu Zhang, Peng Wei, Yang Liu
State Key Laboratory of Silicate Materials for Architectures, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, 430070, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Al2O3 ceramics were prepared by introducing Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive, in which the content and
Thermal storage ratios of Fe2O3 and TiO2 remained constant, but Sm2O3 was variable. The phase transformation, micromor­
Al2O3 ceramics phology, physical properties and thermal properties were investigated. The results showed that Fe2O3 and TiO2
Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3
made the grains high sintering activity through a solid solution mechanism, which promoted grain growth, but
Sintering properties
Thermal properties
Sm2O3 preferred to form SmFe4Al8O19 at the grain boundaries, which slowed grain growth and refined the
grains. With the increase in Sm2O3, the grain refinement of SmFe4Al8O19 became outstanding, and the grain
diameter gradually decreased, which is favorable for denser sintering. However, only a proper amount of Sm2O3
in the Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive resulted in better thermal shock resistance. The Al2O3 ceramics
with 9 wt% Fe2O3-1 wt% TiO2-5 wt% Sm2O3 sintered at 1520 ◦ C exhibited the optimum properties, yielding an
increase in the bending strength by 6.60% after 30 thermal shocks, a thermal conductivity of 13.33–5.64 W/
(m⋅K) (25–800 ◦ C) and a specific heat capacity of 0.94–1.25 J/(g⋅K) (25–800 ◦ C), all of which demonstrate the
potential for thermal storage.

1. Introduction intensive interest due to their outstanding high-temperature properties

Solar thermal power generation, as a renewable energy technology
using solar energy [1,2], has garnered significant interest at the national
level due to its environmental friendliness and good grid adaptability
[3], such as the Crescent Dunes solar power station in United States,
GemaSolar solar power station in Spain and Delingha solar power sta­
tion in China. Thermal storage materials are the kernel to offset solar
intermittency and realize peak avoidance on electric networks in solar
thermal power generation [4,5].
Latent heat storage and sensible heat storage are well-known mature
technologies for thermal storage. Latent heat materials such as molten
salts and alloys realize charge and discharge through the reversible
phase transition between solid and liquid [6], presenting a prominent
advantage over sensible heat materials in thermal storage, but the
drawbacks of severe corrosion, phase separation and low working
temperature impede their application [5,7,8]. In comparison, sensible
heat materials depend on changes in their own temperature for thermal
storage [9]. The characteristics of easy operation, stable properties and
high operating temperature make sensible heat materials preferable
thermal storage candidates [6,10]. In particular, ceramics have received
[11,12].
Alumina (Al2O3) ceramics, as advanced materials, are common in
high-temperature fields such as refractory, cutting tools and aerospace
applications due to excellent high temperature stability and outstanding
wear and corrosion resistance [13,14]. In addition, extensive material
sources, good thermal conductivity and high mechanical properties
render Al2O3 workable and competitive as sensible heat material.
However, the inherent sintering temperature above 1600 ◦ C becomes a
dilemma to realize densification sintering and superior properties.
Although oscillatory pressure sintering, hot pressing sintering and
spark-plasma sintering can significantly decrease the sintering temper­
ature and improve the properties [15–17], specific equipment and
complex programs lead to high investment and low output and effi­
ciency. In comparison, introducing additive is simple, inexpensive and
high feasible. Fe2O3 and TiO2 are frequently used additives, and their
cations can substitute Al ions in Al2O3 due to their similar ion radii,
resulting in lattice distortion and vacancies that reduce the corre­
sponding sintering activation energy [18–20], which can realize acti­
vated sintering and lower the sintering temperature of Al2O3 ceramics.
In addition, Sm2O3 is a rare earth oxide and has a larger ion radius,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhangqiankun@whut.edu.cn (Q. Zhang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2021.12.359
Received 6 October 2021; Received in revised form 27 December 2021; Accepted 30 December 2021
Available online 2 January 2022
0272-8842/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd and Techna Group S.r.l. All rights reserved.
X. Xu et al. Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364

Table 1 of Fe2O3 and TiO2 remained constant and were 10 wt% and 9:1,
The batch formulas of samples (wt%). respectively, but Sm2O3 was a variable in the Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 sys­
Sample No. α-Al2O3 Fe2O3 TiO2 Sm2O3 (in addition) tem. The effect of the Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive on the
phase transformation, micromorphology, physical properties, thermal
D1 90 9 1 1
D2 90 9 1 3 shock resistance and thermophysical properties was investigated. The
D3 90 9 1 5 main emphasis of this work was to understand the mechanism of the
D4 90 9 1 7 Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive on the sintering and thermal
properties of Al2O3 ceramics for thermal storage.

2. Experimental methods

2.1. Materials and processing

This study used α-Al2O3 (mean diameter of 1.85 μm, purity ≥ 99%,
Shandong Alumina Industry Group Co., Ltd., China) as the main raw
material, and Fe2O3, TiO2 and Sm2O3 (purity ≥ 99%, Sinopharm
Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd., China) were used to form Fe2O3–TiO2-
Sm2O3 composite sintering additive. The materials were mixed evenly
through dry milling according to the formulas in Table 1. Then, the
mixture was formed into rectangular green compacts (35 mm × 3 mm ×
4 mm) after mixing with 5 wt% polyvinyl alcohol solutions. The green
compacts were dried at 100 ◦ C for 24 h and subsequently sintered from
1480 ◦ C to 1600 ◦ C via the pressureless sintering method, in which the
soaking time at the sintering temperature was 2 h.

2.2. Characterization

The morphology and selected spot components were determined by

Fig. 1. XRD patterns of samples.
leading to low solubility in Al2O3 and slow ion migration during sin­
tering, which can refine the grains in Al2O3 ceramics and improve the
mechanical properties. Y. Yao [21] demonstrated that Sm2O3 could
refine the grain size and strengthen the grain boundaries, improving the
mechanical strength of Al2O3 ceramics. X. Xu [22] also reported that
Sm2O3 in cordierite-mullite-corundum composite ceramics could
improve densification by forming a liquid-phase and improve bending
strength by refining grains. Therefore, the combination of Fe2O3, TiO2
and Sm2O3 shows the potential to improve the sintering and properties
of Al2O3 ceramics. Unfortunately, few clear images about the mecha­
nism of Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive on the properties of
Al2O3 ceramics have been presented.
In this study, Al2O3 ceramics were prepared by introducing
Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive, in which the content and ratios
field emission transmission electron microscopy (TEM, Tecnai G2 F20 S-
TWIN, FEI, America) with energy dispersion spectroscopy (EDS). Crys­
talline phases were analyzed by X-ray diffraction (XRD, Model D/Max-
IIIA, Rigakeu, Japan). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Model JSM-
5610LV, Jeol, Japan) was employed to observe the microstructures.
Archimedes method was applied to measure the apparent porosity
(Pa) and bulk density (D). The three-point bending method was per­
formed to test the bending strength by a Model RGM-4100 universal
testing machine (Reger Instrument Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China). Image-
Pro Plus 6.0 was employed to randomly select 200 grains in the SEM
images to assess the average grain diameter.
The thermal shock resistance was determined by first placing the
samples in a furnace and heating the samples from room temperature to
1100 ◦ C at 5 ◦ C/min. Then, after holding for 15 min at 1100 ◦ C, the
samples were removed from the furnace and cooled to room tempera­
ture. One-time thermal shock was accomplished. The bending strength
and bending strength loss rate after different thermal shock times was
tested to characterize the thermal shock resistance, in which the defi­
nition of bending strength loss rate was as follows:
σ0 − σt
S= × 100% (1)
σ0
where S is the bending strength loss rate (%), σ0 is the bending strength
(MPa) before thermal shock and σt is the bending strength (MPa) after
thermal shock.
The thermophysical properties were obtained by LFA467 laser flash
thermal constant analyzer made by Netzsch (Germany).
3. Result and discuss
3.1. Phase composition analysis
The XRD patterns of samples are shown in Fig. 1. The phase com­
positions were corundum and samarium iron aluminum oxide
(SmFe4Al8O19), in which corundum was the main crystalline phase. In
addition, the phase compositions hardly changed as the temperature
increased from 1500 ◦ C to 1520 ◦ C, but the peak intensity of

11357
X. Xu et al. Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364

Fig. 2. TEM analysis of D3 sintered at 1520 ◦ C: (a) TEM image, (b) SAED pattern of area A, (c) SAED pattern of area B and (d) EDS spectrum of selected points.

SmFe4Al8O19 obviously increased with increasing Sm2O3, which in­

Table 2 dicates that Sm2O3 favored the formation of SmFe4Al8O19 in the
The crystal index of corundum and SmFe4Al8O19. Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3–Al2O3 system and that the SmFe4Al8O19 had good
Crystal index Corundum PDF#75-0782 SmFe4Al8O19 PDF#76–1089 thermal stability.
Rhombohedral system (Area Hexagonal system (Area B) The TEM image, SAED pattern and EDS analysis of D3 sintered at
A)
1520 ◦ C are shown in Fig. 2. As seen in Fig. 2b and c and Table 2, areas A
Crystal PDF card Measurement PDF card Measurement and B in Fig. 2a were corundum and SmFe4Al8O19, respectively, which
spacing d1 2.09 2.07 4.88 4.81
coincided with the XRD analysis (Fig. 1). In addition, according to
/Å d2 1.34 1.37 1.84 1.89
d3 3.49 3.49 2.82 2.86 Fig. 2d and Table 3, spot 1 and spot 2 in Fig. 2a were corundum, and the
Crystal Calculation Measurement Calculation Measurement corundum contained a small amount of element Fe and Ti, which
plane <α> 25.99 26.00 30.00 29.82 demonstrated that Fe2O3 and TiO2 entered into the lattice of corundum,
angle <β> 9.69 9.67 10.89 11.15 which we demonstrated in our previous work [23]. This could improve
/◦ 16.30 16.33 19.11 18.68
the sintering of Al2O3 ceramics due to the solid solution mechanism of
<γ>

Fe2O3 and TiO2. Spot 3, spot 4 and spot 5 were SmFe4Al8O19, which
presented grain-like and film-like distributing in the grain boundaries,
Table 3 and closely connected with corundum grains due to in-situ synthesis.
Compositions of the selected spots in Fig. 2a (wt%). Moreover, a small amount of Ti existed in SmFe4Al8O19, meaning that
Spot No. Al O Sm Fe Ti Phase composition TiO2 outstripped the solubility in the corundum, while SmFe4Al8O19
could purify the excess TiO2 in the grain boundaries, which could
1 60.53 31.75 0 7.62 0.03 Corundum
2 58.64 35.32 0.18 5.72 0.05 Corundum contribute to the mechanical strength.
3 34.59 39.87 10.88 12.17 1.42 SmFe4Al8O19
4 37.40 30.20 14.62 15.25 1.46 SmFe4Al8O19
3.2. Microstructure analysis
5 39.01 35.87 9.79 12.91 1.49 SmFe4Al8O19

Fig. 3 shows the microstructures of the samples, and the corre­

sponding average grain diameter is shown in Fig. 4. When the sintering
temperature was 1500 ◦ C, the grains in D1 grew well and were equiaxed
(Fig. 3a), and there was a closed connection between grains, but the

11358
X. Xu et al. Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364

Fig. 3. SEM micrograph of samples.

11359
X. Xu et al.
Fig. 4. The average grain diameter of samples.
smooth grain boundaries showed that the main fracture mode was
intergranular. In contrast, D2 contained obvious tear marks (Fig. 3 b),
which indicates that the boundary strength was enhanced, and the
phenomenon was beneficial to the mechanical strength. These results
are explained by the combined effects of both the in-situ synthesis of
SmFe4Al8O19 and the solid solution mechanism of Fe2O3 and TiO2 ac­
cording to the XRD and TEM analysis (Figs. 1 and 2). In addition, the
grain diameter in D2 was smaller than that in D1(Fig. 4), which might
correlate with the increase in SmFe4Al8O19 (Fig. 1). In view of the large
radius of Sm3+, diffusion migration was difficult; thus, SmFe4Al8O19
could inhibit grain growth. When the sintering temperature increased
from 1500 ◦ C to 1520 ◦ C, the grain diameter in D3 and D4 decreased
rather than increased (Fig. 4) and gradually decreased with the increase
of Sm2O3, which was because the more Sm2O3, the more SmFe4Al8O19
(Fig. 1), the finer grain, the smaller grain diameter. Moreover, there
were more tear marks in D3 and D4, showing more transgranular frac­
ture, which improved the mechanical strength.
When the sintering temperature reached 1600 ◦ C, the grain diameter
continued to decrease gradually with increasing Sm2O3 (Fig. 4), which
indicates that SmFe4Al8O19 still had the effect of grain refinement and
the grain diameter was positively correlated with the SmFe4Al8O19
content. Furthermore, the grains in the samples tended to grow well and
more equiaxed grains were formed, which demonstrates that the tem­
perature was the main factor for grain growth in the higher temperature
environment. The grain diameter at 1600 ◦ C was larger than that at low
temperature (Fig. 4), resulting in some pores in the grain boundaries
(Fig. 3), which had a negative impact on the mechanical strength.
Fig. 5. Function between physical properties and the sintering temperatures: (a) apparent porosity, (b) bulk density, (c) bending strength.
11360
Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364
3.3. Physical properties
The physical properties of the samples are shown in Fig. 5. As seen in
Fig. 5a, the apparent porosity first gradually decreased and then tended
to little change, which agreed with the sintering theory. However, the
apparent porosity of D1 had an abnormal increase after 1540 ◦ C, and
that for D2-D4 after 1580 ◦ C, which indicates that D2-D4 had wider
sintering temperature range. This phenomenon was associated with
SmFe4Al8O19, because the formation of SmFe4Al8O19 needed to
consume Fe2O3, which reduced the Fe2O3 content in the corundum,
leading to a decrease in the sintering activity. According to the XRD
analysis (Fig. 1), D1 contains less SmFe4Al8O19, meaning that the
corundum contained more Fe2O3, namely, the grains in D1 had higher
sintering activity, resulting in larger grains at low temperature. Some
pores were produced in the grain boundaries by sacrificing small grains,
which was confirmed by the microstructures at 1600 ◦ C (Fig. 3). How­
ever, D2-D4 had a smaller grain diameter due to the grain refinement of
SmFe4Al8O19 (Fig. 4). Although a higher temperature could promote
grain growth, smaller grain diameter tended to form denser micro­
structures [15], giving the samples better densification sintering prop­
erties, which was identical to the density trend in Fig. 5b.
As seen in Fig. 5c, the bending strength first increased and then
decreased with the increasing temperature, and the maximum bending
strengths of D1, D2, D3 and D4 were 195.47 MPa (1500 ◦ C), 228.83 MPa
(1520 ◦ C), 235.22 MPa (1520 ◦ C) and 246.54 MPa (1540 ◦ C), respec­
tively, and the temperature at the crest of the bending strength gradually
increased. According to the microstructures (Fig. 3), these results were
due to the increasing sintering temperature promoting grain growth and
adhesion. When the grains grew well and the microstructures tended to
be perfect, the bending strength had a maximum, but when the sintering
temperature exceeded the threshold, larger grains were formed gradu­
ally due to the extension of the adhesive neck between grains (Fig. 4),
which resulted in defects (e.g., pores) that reduced the bending strength
(Figs. 3 and 4a). In addition, the increase in SmFe4Al8O19 could cause a
decrease in grain activity due to the consumption of Fe2O3, which
required a higher temperature to make the samples have perfect mi­
crostructures that reached the maximum bending strength.
Considering that low porosity is instrumental in the bending strength
and thermophysical properties of thermal storage materials, based on
the above physical properties, D1 and D2 sintered at 1500 ◦ C and D3 and
D4 sintered at 1520 ◦ C had preferable properties. The apparent poros­
ities were 0.24%, 0.28%, 0.33% and 0.25%, and the corresponding
bending strengths were 195.47 MPa, 210.42 MP, 235.22 MP and 205.51
MP, respectively.
3.4. Thermal shock resistance
Thermal storage materials frequently undergo alternating heating
and cooling environments during the charge-discharge progress; thus,
superior thermal shock resistance is essential to ensure long-term
X. Xu et al.
Fig. 6. Bending strength of samples after thermal shock.
operation of solar thermal power generation. The bending strengths of
the samples before and after thermal shock test are shown in Fig. 6.
During thermal shock tests, D1 had a slight decrease in the bending
strength, the bending strengths of D2 and D3 increased, and D4 had an
abnormal decrease in the bending strength after 20 thermal shocks.
Compared with the bending strength before thermal shock, D1 and D4
decreased by 9.33% and 14.07% after 30 thermal shocks, but D2 and D3
increased by 17.24% and 6.60%, respectively. Moreover, the bending
strength of D3 always remained higher during thermal shock, which
meant it possessed superior thermal shock resistance.
The XRD patterns of the samples after 30 thermal shocks are shown
in Fig. 7. The phase composition of the samples hardly changed and
were still corundum and SmFe4Al8O19 before and after 30 thermal
shocks (Figs. 1 and 7), indicating better chemical and thermal stability.
However, compared with the microstructures before thermal shock
(Fig. 3a), more pores in grain boundaries and intragranular pores existed
in D1 after 30 thermal shocks (Fig. 8a). Considering the higher activity
of the grains in D1, the phenomenon might be the result of small grain
merger and grain boundary migration, but the pores easily became the
stress concentration zones during thermal shock, which reduced the
bending strength in D1. Compared with D1, the grain diameter in D2 and
D3 remained smaller after 30 thermal shocks (Fig. 8b and c), which
might be closely related to SmFe4Al8O19. The peak intensities of
SmFe4Al8O19 in D2 and D3 were higher than that in D1(Fig. 7), meaning
that more SmFe4Al8O19 constrained grain growth. Moreover, the grain
boundary strength was strengthened during thermal shock due to the
activation of Fe2O3 and TiO2, which was demonstrated by the tear marks
and bonding between grains in the enlarged zones in Fig. 8b and c. This
phenomenon might be the main reason for the increase in their bending
strength after thermal shock. According to the peak intensities of
SmFe4Al8O19 (Fig. 7) and the grain diameter trend (Fig. 4), D3 should
contain more small grains than D2, which would render D3 superior
thermal shock resistance through fine grain strengthening. As observed
in Fig. 8d, D4 also had abundant small grains after 30 thermal shocks,
but some smaller grains presented segregation. Although small grains
11361
Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364
could resolve the thermal stress, segregation could cause internal stress.
When exceeding a certain degree, internal stress became the main factor
that deteriorated the thermal shock resistance. Therefore, the bending
strength of D4 decreased after 20 thermal shocks.
3.5. Thermophysical properties
The thermophysical properties are the key to heat transfer capability
and thermal storage properties. Table 4 shows the thermophysical
properties of D3. As seen in Table 4, the specific heat capacity gradually
increased until it remained constant at 450 ◦ C, which was in agreement
with the Debye theory [24] and showed that the increase in thermal
storage with increasing temperature was beneficial for thermal effi­
ciency in a high-temperature environment.
The thermal conductivity was negatively correlated with the tem­
perature and decreased from 13.33 W/(m⋅K) to 5.64 W/(m⋅K) with
increasing temperature (25–800 ◦ C), which was in agreement with the
phonon conduction theory of inorganic materials and was the result of
reducing mean free path due to increasing lattice vibration scattering
during elevating temperature [25]. The thermal conductivity of D3 was
clearly slightly lower than that of previously reported Al2O3 ceramics
(14.81–18.4 W/(m⋅K) at room temperature) [10,23,26], which might be
attributed to SmFe4Al8O19, because the atomic weight of Sm was bigger
that lowed the Debye temperature and the specific heat capacity, and the
thermal conductivity was reduced in view of the positive correlation
between thermal conductivity and specific heat capacity. Furthermore,
the complex crystal structure of SmFe4Al8O19 reduced the mean free
path, resulting in the decrease of thermal conductivity. Nevertheless, the
thermal conductivity of D3 had an evident advantage over that of the
other ceramics such as β-Sialon/Si3N4 composite ceramics (8.84
W/(m⋅K) at 36 ◦ C) [27], alumina/calcium-hexaluminate ceramic (5.29
W/(m⋅K) at 25 ◦ C) [28] and SiCw-Al2O3 composite ceramics (8.96
W/(m⋅K) at 29.6 ◦ C) [29], which indicates better heat transfer
capability.
X. Xu et al.
Fig. 7. XRD patterns of samples after 30 thermal shocks.
4. Conclusions
Al2O3 ceramics were prepared by introducing Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3
composite additive, in which the content and ratios of Fe2O3 and TiO2
remained constant, but Sm2O3 was variable. The effect of the
Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive on the phase transformation,
micromorphology, physical properties and thermal properties was
investigated. The key results were concluded as follows:
Fe2O3 and TiO2 caused the grains to have high sintering activity
through a solid solution mechanism, which tended to promote grain
growth, but Sm2O3 favored the formation of SmFe4Al8O19 at grain
boundaries, which slowed grain growth due to the consumption of Fe2O3
and grain refinement.
When the Sm2O3 content was 1 wt%, the solid solution mechanism of
Fe2O3 and TiO2 in the corundum was outstanding, which resulted in
larger grains that were detrimental to the physical properties and ther­
mal shock resistance. With an increase in the Sm2O3, a decrease in the
grain diameter was obvious due to the formation of more SmFe4Al8O19,
which promoted denser sintering. However, when the sample contained
abundant small grains, the smaller grains tended to segregate during
thermal shock, which could produce internal stress that harmed the
11362
Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364
thermal shock resistance. Only a proper amount of Sm2O3 in the
Fe2O3–TiO2-Sm2O3 composite additive resulted in better thermal shock
resistance.
The Al2O3 ceramics with 9 wt% Fe2O3-1 wt% TiO2-5 wt% Sm2O3
sintered at 1520 ◦ C had the optimum properties: the porosity and
bending strength were 0.33% and 235.22 MPa, respectively. After 30
thermal shocks, the bending strength increased by 6.60% due to the
grain refinement strengthening of SmFe4Al8O19 and the enhancement of
the grain boundary strength. When the temperature ranged from 25 ◦ C
to 800 ◦ C, the thermal conductivity was 13.33–5.64 W/(m⋅K) and the
corresponding specific heat capacity was 0.94–1.25 J/(g⋅K), which
shows promise for application in thermal storage.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
X. Xu et al. Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364

Fig. 8. SEM micrograph of samples after 30 thermal shocks: (a) D1, (b) D2, (c) D3, (d) D4.

[6] S. Khare, M. Dell’Amico, C. Knight, et al., Selection of materials for high

Table 4 temperature sensible energy storage, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cell. 115 (2013)
The thermophysical properties of D3. 114–122.
[7] X. Lao, X. Xu, W. Jiang, et al., Effect of aluminum on performances of cordierite-
Sample Temperature/ Thermal Thermal Specific heat SiCw composite ceramics for high-temperature sensible thermal storage, J. alloy.
no. ◦
C conductivity/W/ diffusivity/ capacity/J/ Compd. 780 (2019) 378–387.
(m⋅K) mm2/s (g⋅K) [8] G. Alva, L. Liu, X. Huang, et al., Thermal energy storage materials and systems for
solar energy applications, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 68 (2017) 693–706.
D3 25 13.33 3.57 0.94 [9] A. Aggarwal, N. Goyal, A. Kumar, Thermal characteristics of sensible heat storage
150 10.41 2.37 1.10 materials applicable for concentrated solar power systems, Mater. Today Proc. 47
300 8.32 1.79 1.17 (2021) 5812–5817.
450 7.47 1.47 1.27 [10] X. Xu, X. Lao, J. Wu, et al., Synthesis and characterization of Al2O3/SiC composite
600 6.54 1.29 1.28 ceramics via carbothermal reduction of aluminosilicate precursor for solar sensible
800 5.64 1.13 1.25 thermal storage, J. Alloys Compd. 662 (2016) 126–137.
[11] N.L. Ferber, D.P. Minh, Q. Falcoz, et al., Ceramics from municipal waste incinerator
bottom ash and wasted clay for sensible heat storage at high temperature, Waste.
Biomass Valori. 11 (2020) 3107–3120.
Acknowledgments [12] Q. Li, F. Bai, B. Yang, et al., Dynamic simulations of a honeycomb ceramic thermal
energy storage in a solar thermal power plant using air as the heat transfer fluid,
The authors thank financial support of the Foshan Xianhu Laboratory Appl. Therm. Eng. 129 (2018) 636–645.
[13] Z. Yin, C. Huang, B. Zou, et al., High temperature mechanical properties of Al2O3/
of the Advanced Energy Science and Technology Guangdong Laboratory TiC micro–nano-composite ceramic tool materials, Ceram. Int. 39 (2013)
(XHD2020-001). 8877–8883.
[14] S. Yang, J.K. Xu, Z.L. Xiao, et al., Experimental study on process parameters of
high-speed micro-milling Al2O3 ceramics, Appl. Mech. Mater. 599–601 (2014)
References
48–53.
[15] Y. Yuan, J. Fan, J. Li, et al., Oscillatory pressure sintering of Al2O3 ceramics,
[1] L. Yuan, Q. Zhu, T. Zhang, et al., Performance evaluation of a co-production system Ceram. Int. 46 (2020) 15670–15673.
of solar thermal power generation and seawater desalination, Renew. Energy 169 [16] Y.H. Ma, J.H. Ouyang, Z.G. Wang, et al., Insights into intragranular precipitation
(2021) 1121–1133. and strengthening effect in Al2O3/SmAlO3 ceramic with eutectic composition,
[2] N. Khandelwal, M. Sharma, O. Singh, et al., Recent developments in integrated Mater. Sci. Eng. 754 (2019) 382–389.
solar combined cycle power plants, J. Therm. Sci. 29 (2020) 298–322. [17] Y. Pristinskiy, N.W.S. pinargote, A. Smirnov, The effect of MgO addition on the
[3] S. Tahir, M. Ahmad, H.M. Abd-ur-Rehman, et al., Techno-economic assessment of microstructure and mechanical properties of alumina ceramic obtained by spark
concentrated solar thermal power generation and potential barriers in its plasma sintering, Mater. Today: proceedings. 19 (2019) 1990–1993.
deployment in Pakistan, J. Clean. Prod. 15 (2021) 126125. [18] J.K. Bristow, D. Tiana, S.C. Parker, et al., Defect chemistry of Ti and Fe impurities
[4] S.S. Bhogilla, P.S.R. Sreekanth, Assessing the influence of thermal energy storage and aggregates in Al2O3, J. Mater. Chem. A. 2 (2014) 6198–6208.
on the performance of concentrating solar power plant, Energy Storage e207 [19] W.R. Rao, I.B. Cutler, Effect of iron oxide on the sintering kinetics of Al2O3, J. Am.
(2020) 1–12. Ceram. Soc. 56 (1973) 588–593.
[5] T. Nahhas, X. Py, N. Sadik, Experimental investigation of basalt rocks as storage [20] A.R. Moon, M.R. Phillips, Defect clustering and color in Fe,Ti: α-Al2O3, J. Am.
material for high-temperature concentrated solar power plants, Renew. Sustain. Ceram. Soc. 77 (1994) 356–367.
Energy Rev. 110 (2019) 226–235. [21] Y. Yao, C. Li, L. Wang, et al., Mechanical behaviors of alumina ceramics doped with
rare-earth oxides, Rare Met. 29 (2010) 456–459.

11363
X. Xu et al.
[22] X. Xu, X. Xu, J. Wu, et al., Effect of Sm2O3 on microstructure, thermal shock
resistance and thermal conductivity of cordierite-mullite-corundum composite
ceramics for solar heat transmission pipeline, Ceram. Int. 42 (2016) 13525–13534.
[23] X. Xu, Q. Zhang, J. Wu, et al., Preparation and characterization of corundum-based
ceramics for thermal storage, Ceram. Int. 47 (2021) 23620–23629.
[24] B.A. Mamedov, Accurate analytical evaluation of heat capacity of nuclear fuels
using Einstein-Debye approximation, Nucl. Eng. Des. 276 (2014) 124–127.
[25] K.W. Schlichting, N.P. Padture, P.G. Klemens, Thermal conductivity of dense and
porous yttria-stabilized zirconia, J. Mater. Sci. 36 (2001) 3003–3010.
11364
Ceramics International 48 (2022) 11356–11364
[26] Y. Yang, M. Ma, F. Zhang, et al., Low-temperature sintering of Al2O3 ceramics
doped with 4CuO-TiO2-2Nb2O5 composite oxide sintering aid, J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.
40 (2020) 5504–5510.
[27] J. Wu, Y. Zhang, X. Xu, et al., A novel in-situ β-Sialon/Si3N4 ceramic used for solar
heat absorber, Ceram. Int. 41 (2015) 14440–14446.
[28] J. Wu, C. Zhang, X. Xu, et al., Preparation and characterization of alumina/
calcium-hexaluminate ceramic composites from ferrotitanium slag, J. Eur. Ceram.
Soc. 40 (2020) 4265–4275.
[29] X. Xu, X. Lao, J. Wu, et al., In-situ synthesis of SiCw/Al2O3 composite honeycomb
ceramics by aluminium-assisted carbothermal reduction of coal series kaolin, Appl.
Clay Sci. 126 (2016) 122–131.