*** This version of Confluence is for testing only and contains a copy of content from June 29th 2026. No changes will be preserved. ***
...
The following two graphs show the temperature as a function of time for the two tests.
The The above plots show that the glass and ceramic cooled down (Test 2) significantly faster than it heated up (Test 1). The piece of ceramic was placed on the black plate, so it reached the highest temperature of all four measurements in the graph. The temperature of glass was about 20^°^C below that of the oven air for both tests, while the ambient air in the lab stayed the same. Since the cool-down of "test 2" was significantly faster than the heating up of "test 1", the strain will also differ between the two tests, as discussed in the following paragraphs.
...
The four plots below show the relationship between strain and temperature in the glass and the ceramic for the tests.
Figure 3 - Strain vs. Temperature for the Ceramic in Test 1
...
Test 1 was done when the oven was already cooled down to the room temperature while test 2 was done following the cool down of test 1. Therefore, test 2 did not start from the room temperature---the glass and ceramic were at 30^°^C when the test began. This explains the difference in the above two ceramic plots. In test 1, the cool down was moderate since the doors were kept shut as the lamps were turned off. This allowed the glass and the ceramic to recover the strain more smoothly, as indicated by the absence of a gap between heating and cooling in test 1. In test 2, however, the cool down was extreme since the doors were opened and the lamps were turned off. With the faster cool-down rate, the glass and the ceramic responded faster in its strain behavior and the end points reached positive values as they reached the room temperature. In test 1, the strains do not cross zero because it never recovered to its room temperature.
...