Optimizing the mechanical integrity of ceramic-metal bonds requires an understanding of the influence of numerous variables on strength. These include processing, interfacial chemistry and morphology, thermal and elastic mismatch, and metal yield strength and thickness which, in turn, dictate considerations of residual and applied stress distributions, flaw populations in the ceramic and at the interface, the interfacial fracture resistance, and the resultant crack path. The influence of metal plasticity is especially strong when low yield strength metals are used. Localized plasticity may blunt interface flaws and limit stress concentrations that develop at and near the interface and can induce premature brittle fracture of either the interface or ceramic. The driving force to form a ceramic-metal interface is the yield in free energy when intimate contact is achieved between the ceramic and metal, and is characterized by the work of adhesion, W[sub ad]. The interfacial fracture energy is typically much larger owing to dissipative processes, including metal plasticity, but the extent of these may scale with W[sub ad]. It has been widely considered that a low metal contact angle, as observed in sessile drop experiments, is a prerequisite for the formation of a strong ceramic-metal bond. But recent experience has shownmore » that bonds between ceramics and ductile metals can be strong despite characteristic contact angles > 90[degree]. Some correlation between low contact angle and good bond strength may be, in part, a result of more easily obtaining a high fraction of bonded area, and low stress concentrations. Therefore, it is anticipated that a fundamental correlation exists between good interfacial bonding and high strength. This paper makes a preliminary attempt to distinguish the relative importance of the various primary and secondary ways such bonding can be important, a distinction which rarely has been articulated clearly.« less
Read full abstract