A DFT-Based Descriptor to Predict the Water Vapor Corrosion Resistance of Rare-Earth Monosilicates
1
State Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 201899, China
2
College of Materials Science and Opto-Electronic Technology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2022, 15(7), 2414; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15072414
Submission received: 26 February 2022
/
Revised: 18 March 2022
/
Accepted: 21 March 2022
/
Published: 25 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Materials Simulation and Design)
Abstract
:Rare-earth monosilicates are used as environmental barrier coatings (EBCs) due to their excellent water vapor corrosion resistance. However, existing experimental studies on the water vapor corrosion behavior of rare-earth monosilicates are discrepant and even contradictory. Previous theoretical investigations on water vapor corrosion resistance mainly focus on a Mulliken analysis of Si-O bonds in the monosilicates. In this study, the structural and electronic properties of rare-earth monosilicates have been studied by density functional theory (DFT) calculations, and a descriptor correlated to the corrosion resistance has been developed. The maximum isosurface value of the valence band maximum (VBMFmax) can be used to predict the water vapor corrosion resistance of RE2SiO5. The results show that RE2SiO5 with a smaller VBMFmax may have better water vapor corrosion resistance.
1. Introduction
Rare-earth (RE) silicates are promising candidates for environmental barrier coatings (EBCs) due to their exceptional high-temperature durability, chemical compatibility and water vapor corrosion resistance [1]. Rare-earth monosilicates, RE2SiO5, have two types of monoclinic crystalline structures: RE2SiO5 with a space group of P21/c are called X1 phase when the ionic radius of RE elements (RE = La~Gd) is larger, while the X2 phase with a C2/c space group forms by the elements from Tb to Lu [2]. The water vapor corrosion behaviors and mechanisms may be different between the two phases.
Recently, many experimental studies have been carried out regarding the water vapor corrosion resistance of RE2SiO5 as EBCs. Wang et al. [3] found that X2-RE2SiO5 are more stable than X1-RE2SiO5 in high-temperature water steam. Nasiri et al. [4] investigated the water vapor corrosion resistance of RE2SiO5 (RE = Y, Gd, Er, Yb and Lu) in air with 90% water, and found that their water vapor resistance has the following order: Y2SiO5 > Er2SiO5 > Yb2SiO5 > Lu2SiO5 > Gd2SiO5. Klemm et al. [5] studied the water vapor corrosion resistance of Y2SiO5 and Sc2SiO5, indicating that Y2SiO5 exhibited better water vapor corrosion resistance. Unfortunately, the existing experimental studies on the water vapor corrosion behavior of rare-earth monosilicates may be discrepant or even contradictory due to the different experimental conditions [6]. It is worth pointing out that the water vapor corrosion resistance of rare-earth monosilicates can also be evaluated by theoretical calculations. For example, Han et al. [7] studied the water vapor corrosion resistance of X2-RE2SiO5 (RE = Lu, Yb, Tm, Er, Ho, Dy, Y and Sc) using first-principles calculations. They concluded that the water vapor corrosion resistance of X2-RE2SiO5 demonstrated the following order: Sc2SiO5 > Dy2SiO5 > Y2SiO5 > Ho2SiO5 > Er2SiO5 > Yb2SiO5 > Tm2SiO5 > Lu2SiO5, which shows some disagreement with the experimental findings [3,5,6]. Therefore, it is still a challenge to provide a precise order of the water vapor corrosion resistance of RE2SiO5.
In previous theoretical studies [7,8], researchers mainly focused on the Si-O bonds instead of RE-O bonds of rare-earth silicates to compare their water vapor corrosion resistances. However, the [REOx] polyhedron is less rigid than the [SiO4] tetrahedral, and is easier to collapse and react with water molecules. In this work, we used density functional theory (DFT) calculations to investigate the water vapor corrosion resistance of RE2SiO5 through RE-O bonds. By comparing the structural and electronic properties of RE2SiO5, we have developed a descriptor, i.e., the maximum isosurface value of the valence band maximum (VBMFmax), to predict their water vapor corrosion resistances.
2. Materials and Methods
All DFT calculations were performed using the Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package (VASP) [9]. The projector augmented-wave (PAW) method and plane-wave basis sets are used [10,11]. The Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof (PBE) potential is adopted to treat exchange–correlation interactions at the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) level [12]. The cut-off energy for the plane-wave basis was set to 520 eV throughout the present study. The k-point sampling of the Brillouin zone is based on the Monkhorst–Pack method [13]. A 3 × 4 × 4 k-point grid and a 2 × 5 × 3 k-point grid were used for X1-RE2SiO5 and X2-RE2SiO5, respectively. The crystal structures were completely optimized by the lattice parameters and internal atomic coordinates until the total energy difference and the forces on atoms were less than 1.0 × 10−6 eV and 0.01 eV/Å, respectively. Visualizations of all the structures were performed using VESTA [14].
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Crystal Structure of RE2SiO5
The calculated lattice parameters of RE2SiO5 and the experimental data are compared in Table 1, and the 1% disagreement suggests that the optimized structures are reasonable. The crystal structures of X1- and X2-RE2SiO5 are shown in Figure 1a,b. The unit cell of RE2SiO5 contains 32 atoms, including two different RE sites (labeled as RE1 and RE2), one Si site and five different O sites (labeled as O1–O5). The four O positions of O1–O4 form a Si-centered tetrahedron [SiO4], while O5 atoms only loosely bond with rare-earth atoms [2]. The difference between X1-RE2SiO5 and X2-RE2SiO5 lies in the coordination number of rare-earth atoms, ranging from nine to seven and seven to six [2]. Figure 1c shows the energy difference between the X1 phase and X2 phase for the same RE2SiO5. The increasing energy difference indicates that the structural stability of the X1 phase decreases with the increasing ionic radius of RE atoms; RE elements tend to more often form X2-RE2SiO5 with an increase in the ionic radius of RE atoms [15].
When exposed to water-vapor-containing environments, RE2SiO5 will suffer from rapid recession, eventually generating Si(OH)4 and RE(OH)3 gas [3,6]. Generally, the [REOx] polyhedron is less rigid than the [SiO4] tetrahedral, and the RE-O bonds tend to show different bonding properties for different rare-earth monosilicates. As shown in Figure 2, we found that the radial distribution functions, g(r), of Si-O bonds remained unchanged, while the distribution of RE-O bonds changed remarkably in both X1- and X2-RE2SiO5. Therefore, the difference in the water vapor corrosion resistance should be closely related to the changing RE-O bonds and their electronic structures.
3.2. The Valence Band Maximum (VBM) of RE2SiO5
Chemical reactivity can be related to the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) and lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) characteristics in molecules, while in bulk materials it can be described by the valence band maximum (VBM) and the conduction band minimum (CBM) [22]. Previously, we [23] investigated the hydration sensitivity of triclinic tricalcium silicate by a combination of DFT calculations and molecular dynamics. We found that the long-term reaction with water molecules is controlled by the proton transport of silicate, and can be intrinsically related to the valence band maximum of the bulk solid. Similarly, for the corrosion behaviors induced by water vapor, the valance band maximum (VBM) of the bulk solid could be used as a descriptor to estimate the water-related corrosion resistance.
Figure 3 shows the partial charge density at the VBM of X1-RE2SiO5. The partial charge density at the VBM only exists at the sites of O atoms, suggesting that O atoms would experience an electrophilic attack. Interestingly, the charge densities distributions of X1-RE2SiO5 are almost unchanged for RE = La, Pr, Nd and Sm, and are mainly located around O5 atoms. However, Gd2SiO5 shows a completely different profile, where the charge densities are mainly located around O1–O4 atoms. O5 atoms bond with RE much more loosely when compared with the O1–O4 atoms bonding with Si atoms [2]. This may suggest that Gd2SiO5 is much more stable when reacting with water vapor, indicating that Gd2SiO5 has better water vapor corrosion resistance. The localization of the valence band maximum in RE2SiO5 can be related to the water vapor corrosion resistance, and the maximum isosurface value of the valence band maximum (VBMFmax) can be used to describe the electronic localization of RE2SiO5 [23]. As listed in Table 2, the VBMFmax of Gd2SiO5 is much smaller than that of other X1-RE2SiO5 (RE = La, Pr, Nd, Sm and Eu). More specifically, the VBMFmax of X1-RE2SiO5 ranks as Pr2SiO5 > La2SiO5 > Nd2SiO5 > Sm2SiO5 > Eu2SiO5 > Gd2SiO5. Such a decreasing VBMFmax value corresponds with an increasing water vapor corrosion resistance, implying that Gd2SiO5 has the best water vapor corrosion resistance among X1-RE2SiO5.
For the X2-RE2SiO5 (RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu, Sc and Y) compounds, their VBMFmax is also analyzed, as shown in Figure 4. It is worth pointing out that the charge densities distributions of X2-RE2SiO5 are almost unchanged for RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu and Y. However, Sc2SiO5 shows a slightly different profile, where the charge densities around O atoms are a little more than those of other X2-RE2SiO5. This could imply that Sc2SiO5 is less stable when reacting with water vapor, indicating that Sc2SiO5 has worse water vapor corrosion resistance. Both Y2SiO5 and Er2SiO5 have a smaller value of the VBMFmax than that of Gd2SiO5, indicating that Gd2SiO5 has worse water vapor corrosion resistance. This is in agreement with the experimental outcomes of Wang et al. [3]. On the basis of the trend in Figure 3c, Y2SiO5 has better water vapor corrosion resistance than Sc2SiO5, which is consistent with what Klemm et al. concluded [5]. The decreasing order of RE2SiO5 (RE = Y, Er and Lu) in our results may also provide an explanation for the experimental results conducted by Nasiri et al. [4]. Additionally, we can conclude that the water vapor corrosion resistance of X2-RE2SiO5 has the following order: Tb2SiO5 > Dy2SiO5 > Y2SiO5 > Ho2SiO5 > Er2SiO5 > Tm2SiO5 > Lu2SiO5 > Sc2SiO5.
4. Conclusions
The water vapor corrosion resistance of RE2SiO5 (RE = La, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu, Sc and Y) was studied based on DFT calculations. A DFT-based descriptor, the maximum isosurface value of the valence band maximum (VBMFmax), was developed to predict the corrosion resistance for both X1- and X2-RE2SiO5. According to the proposed descriptor, it was found that Gd2SiO5 had the best water vapor corrosion resistance in X1-RE2SiO5 and that the water vapor corrosion resistance of X2-RE2SiO5 has the following order: Tb2SiO5 > Dy2SiO5 > Y2SiO5 > Ho2SiO5 > Er2SiO5 > Tm2SiO5 > Lu2SiO5 > Sc2SiO5.
Author Contributions
Methodology, Q.W.; formal analysis, Q.W.; data curation, Q.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Q.W.; writing—review and editing, J.H.; conceptualization, J.H.; supervision, J.H.; funding acquisition, J.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 51971237) and the Science and Technology Committee of Shanghai Municipal (grant no. 22ZR1471400).
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Lee, K.N.; Fox, D.S.; Bansal, N.P. Rare earth silicate environmental barrier coatings for SiC/SiC composites and Si3N4 ceramics. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2005, 25, 1705–1715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, Z.L.; Wang, J.Y. Research Progress of Rare Earth Silicate Ceramics. J. Adv. Ceram. 2018, 39, 295–320. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.; Niu, Y.; Zhong, X.; Shi, M.; Mao, F.; Zhang, L.; Li, Q.; Zheng, X. Water vapor corrosion behaviors of plasma sprayed RE2SiO5 (RE = Gd, Y, Er) coatings. Corros. Sci. 2020, 167, 108529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al Nasiri, N.; Patra, N.; Jayaseelan, D.D.; Lee, W.E. Water vapour corrosion of rare earth monosilicates for environmental barrier coating application. Ceram. Int. 2017, 43, 7393–7400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Klemm, H. Silicon Nitride for High-Temperature Applications. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2010, 93, 1501–1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, Z.; Zhang, J.; Sun, L.; Zheng, L.; Wang, J. Robust hydrophobicity and evaporation inertness of rare-earth monosilicates in hot steam at very high temperature. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2019, 102, 3076–3080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, J.; Wang, Y.; Liu, R.; Jiang, D. Study on water vapor corrosion resistance of rare earth monosilicates RE2SiO5 (RE = Lu, Yb, Tm, Er, Ho, Dy, Y, and Sc) from first-principles calculations. Heliyon 2018, 4, e00857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, Y.; Liu, J. First-principles investigation on the corrosion resistance of rare earth disilicates in water vapor. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2009, 29, 2163–2167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kresse, J.F.L.G. Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, 11169–11186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blochl, P.E. Projector augmented-wave method. Phys. Rev. B 1994, 50, 17953–17979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Blochl, P.E.; Jepsen, O.; Andersen, O.K. Improved tetrahedron method for Brillouin-zone integrations. Phys. Rev. B 1994, 49, 16223–16233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Perdew, J.P.; Burke, K.; Ernzerhof, M. Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1996, 77, 3865–3868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Monkhorst, H.J.; Pack, J.D. Special points for Brillouin-zone integrations. Phys. Rev. B 1976, 13, 5188–5192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Momma, K.; Izumi, F. VESTA 3 for three-dimensional visualization of crystal, volumetric and morphology data. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2011, 44, 1272–1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.G.; Tian, S.J.; Li, G.B.; Liao, F.H.; Jing, X.P. Preparation and X-ray characterization of low-temperature phases of R2SiO5 (R = rare earth elements). Mater. Res. Bull. 2001, 36, 1855–1861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fukuda, K.; Iwata, T.; Champion, E. Crystal structure of lanthanum oxyorthosilicate, La2SiO5. Powder Diffr. 2006, 21, 300–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Felsche, J. The crystal chemistry of the rare-earth silicates. Struct. Bond. 1973, 13, 99–197. [Google Scholar]
- León-Reina, L.; Porras-Vázquez, J.M.; Losilla, E.R.; Moreno-Real, L.; Aranda, M.A.G. Structure and oxide anion conductivity in Ln2(TO4)O (Ln=La, Nd; T=Ge, Si). J Solid State Chem. 2008, 181, 2501–2506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smolin, Y.I.; Tkachev, S.P. Determination of the structure of gadolinium oxyorthosilicate (Gd2O3)(SiO2). Kristallografiya 1969, 14, 22. [Google Scholar]
- Phanon, D.; Černý, R. Crystal Structure of the B-type Dierbium Oxideortho-Oxosilicate Er2O[SiO4]. Z. Anorg. Und Allg. Chem. 2008, 634, 1833–1835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gustafsson, T.; Kliintenberg, M.; Derenzo, S.E.; Weber, M.J.; Thomas, J.O. Structure of Lu2 Si O5 using single-crystal X-ray and neutron diffraction. Acta Crystallogr. C 2001, 57, 668–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- DeKock, R.L.; Barbachyn, M.R. Proton Affinity, Ionization Energy, and the Nature of Frontier Orbital Electron Density. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1979, 101, 6516–6519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, J.; Wang, B.; Yu, Y.; Valenzano, L.; Bauchy, M.; Sant, G. Electronic Origin of Doping-Induced Enhancements of Reactivity: Case Study of Tricalcium Silicate. J. Phys. Chem. C 2015, 119, 25991–25999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1.
The crystal structure of RE2SiO5: (a) X1-RE2SiO5 and (b) X2-RE2SiO5. Si tetrahedra, RE polyhedra and O atoms are colored by blue, green and red, respectively. (c) The energy difference between the X1 phase and X2 phase for the same RE2SiO5.
Figure 1.
The crystal structure of RE2SiO5: (a) X1-RE2SiO5 and (b) X2-RE2SiO5. Si tetrahedra, RE polyhedra and O atoms are colored by blue, green and red, respectively. (c) The energy difference between the X1 phase and X2 phase for the same RE2SiO5.
Figure 2.
Radial distribution functions, g(r), of Si-O bonds and RE-O bonds in (a) X1-RE2SiO5 and (b) X2-RE2SiO5 compounds.
Figure 2.
Radial distribution functions, g(r), of Si-O bonds and RE-O bonds in (a) X1-RE2SiO5 and (b) X2-RE2SiO5 compounds.
Figure 3.
The valence band maximum (VBM) of X1-RE2SiO5. (a) X1-RE2SiO5 (RE = La, Pr, Nd and Sm). (b) Eu2SiO5. (c) Gd2SiO5. Si atoms (blue) and O atoms (red) are shown. RE atoms (RE = La, Pr, Nd and Sm) are presented by green, Eu is presented by fuchsia and Gd is presented by purple. The isosurface level is set at 0.005 e/Å.
Figure 3.
The valence band maximum (VBM) of X1-RE2SiO5. (a) X1-RE2SiO5 (RE = La, Pr, Nd and Sm). (b) Eu2SiO5. (c) Gd2SiO5. Si atoms (blue) and O atoms (red) are shown. RE atoms (RE = La, Pr, Nd and Sm) are presented by green, Eu is presented by fuchsia and Gd is presented by purple. The isosurface level is set at 0.005 e/Å.
Figure 4.
The valence band maximum (VBM) of X2-RE2SiO5. (a) X2-RE2SiO5 (RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu and Y). (b) Sc2SiO5. Si atoms (blue) and O atoms (red) are shown. RE atoms (RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu and Y) are presented by green and Sc is presented by light purple. The isosurface level is set at 0.001e/Å. (c) The maximum isosurface value of the valence band maximum (VBMFmax) of X2-RE2SiO5 (RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu, Sc and Y).
Figure 4.
The valence band maximum (VBM) of X2-RE2SiO5. (a) X2-RE2SiO5 (RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu and Y). (b) Sc2SiO5. Si atoms (blue) and O atoms (red) are shown. RE atoms (RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu and Y) are presented by green and Sc is presented by light purple. The isosurface level is set at 0.001e/Å. (c) The maximum isosurface value of the valence band maximum (VBMFmax) of X2-RE2SiO5 (RE = Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu, Sc and Y).
Table 1.
Experimental and calculated lattice parameters of X1- and X2-RE2SiO5.
| Method | a (Å) | b (Å) | c (Å) | β (°) | Volume (Å3) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| La2SiO5 | Expt. [16] Calc. | 9.3320 9.3564 | 7.5088 7.7155 | 7.0332 7.0168 | 108.6790 109.0060 | 466.8700 478.9250 |
| Pr2SiO5 | Expt. [17] Calc. | 9.2530 9.3420 | 7.3010 7.5586 | 6.9340 6.9548 | 108.1500 108.7720 | 445.1000 464.9780 |
| Nd2SiO5 | Expt. [18] Calc. | 9.2295 9.3039 | 7.2848 7.4606 | 6.8744 6.9006 | 108.1990 108.5470 | 439.0800 454.1070 |
| Sm2SiO5 | Expt. [17] Calc. | 9.1610 9.2362 | 7.1120 7.2989 | 6.8210 6.8096 | 107.5100 108.1510 | 424.4000 436.2150 |
| Eu2SiO5 | Expt. [17] Calc. | 9.1420 9.1706 | 7.0540 7.2362 | 6.7900 6.7107 | 107.5300 107.7030 | 417.9000 424.2390 |
| Gd2SiO5 | Expt. [19] Calc. | 9.1200 9.1758 | 7.0600 7.0566 | 6.7300 6.7732 | 107.5800 107.2030 | 413.0900 419.0640 |
| Tb2SiO5 | Expt. Calc. | 14.3660 14.5834 | 6.6976 6.8319 | 10.3633 10.5585 | 122.2190 122.1380 | 843.5900 890.7910 |
| Dy2SiO5 | Expt. [17] Calc. | 14.3800 14.5296 | 6.7400 6.8106 | 10.4200 10.5085 | 122.0000 122.1140 | 856.5000 880.7640 |
| Ho2SiO5 | Expt. [17] Calc. | 14.3500 14.4802 | 6.7100 6.7785 | 10.3700 10.4563 | 122.2000 122.0950 | 843.0000 869.4740 |
| Er2SiO5 | Expt. [20] Calc. | 14.3660 14.4344 | 6.6976 6.7503 | 10.3633 10.4101 | 122.2190 122.1120 | 843.5900 859.1420 |
| Tm2SiO5 | Expt. [17] Calc. | 14.3020 14.3815 | 6.6620 6.7197 | 10.3130 10.3633 | 122.2100 122.0910 | 828.5000 848.4790 |
| Lu2SiO5 | Expt. [21] Calc. | 14.2774 14.2753 | 6.6398 6.6687 | 10.2465 10.2827 | 122.2240 121.9780 | 821.7400 830.3420 |
| Y2SiO5 | Expt. Calc. | 14.5643 14.5111 | 6.8354 6.8113 | 10.5570 10.5122 | 122.1320 122.0870 | 889.9930 880.3030 |
| Sc2SiO5 | Expt. Calc. | 13.8636 13.7566 | 6.4838 6.4896 | 9.9120 10.0833 | 121.5360 120.8350 | 759.3900 772.9450 |
Table 2.
The maximum isosurface value of the valence band maximum (VBMFmax) of X1-RE2SiO5.
| La2SiO5 | Pr2SiO5 | Nd2SiO5 | Sm2SiO5 | Eu2SiO5 | Gd2SiO5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VBMFmax(e/Å3) | 0.098 | 0.099 | 0.097 | 0.094 | 0.060 | 0.053 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Wang, Q.; Huang, J. A DFT-Based Descriptor to Predict the Water Vapor Corrosion Resistance of Rare-Earth Monosilicates. Materials 2022, 15, 2414. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15072414
AMA Style
Wang Q, Huang J. A DFT-Based Descriptor to Predict the Water Vapor Corrosion Resistance of Rare-Earth Monosilicates. Materials. 2022; 15(7):2414. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15072414
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Qianqian, and Jian Huang. 2022. "A DFT-Based Descriptor to Predict the Water Vapor Corrosion Resistance of Rare-Earth Monosilicates" Materials 15, no. 7: 2414. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15072414
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
