It could give you an idea. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311970061_High_Temperatures_and_Intense_Pressure_Effects_On_Morphological_and_Thermal_Properties_of_TiO2_and_ZrO2_Powders

Conference Paper High Temperatures and Intense Pressure Effects On Morphologi...

I am grateful Hatice; I would read through.

Tunji,

Your material looks more like a glass as I can see two endothermic dips  - one at ~ 600 C and second at ~780 C followed by a big exothermic curve pointing towards crystallization. 

Did you characterize your sample by XRD before passing it through DSC? Was it amorphous or crystalline? Even if it is crystalline, it looks like the amount of crystallinity in your sample should be small.

I hope this helps.

Ashutosh

Dear Tunji Owoseni

Kindly see the attached article, maybe can be helpful

http://www.akademiai.com/doi/abs/10.1007/BF02546852

Hi Ashutosh,

Thank you for your response, my powder sample is alumina, its XRD scan shows no amorphous humps but sparay coatings from it did show some amorphous hump. I am yet to estimate the degree of crystallinity of neither the powder nor the coatings.

Cheers

I agree with Ashutosh Goels statement. From the plot there seems to be a glass transition step-like change at 750 oC (from the amorphous part) at 850 oC the crystallization process starts, but it seems not to be finished at the end of your measurement. To determine the crystallization heat from the peak area you need a certain part of baseline behind the crystallization peak. From the correct measured crystallization heat and from literature known crystallization enthalpy of alumina you may calculate the degree of crystallinity easily.

For more precise measurements I would recommend To make an empty crucible run and subtract that from the measurement to get  a drift-free better baseline.

Good luck Gunther Höhne

I can see only one  endothermic baseline shift (Tg) at about 740 C and crystallization starts at 960 C.

I do not agree with Pumlian Munga concerning the crystallization peak. If we take the baseline of the apparatus as a downwards straight line the deviation starts already at 800 oC. 960 is definitive a too high start temperature in this case. Do see that more clearly I recommended to subtract an empty crucible measurement. If this is subtracted you will get an much better baseline and see more clearly the beginning deviation from it which shows the beginning of the exothermic crystallization process which is an both time and temperature dependent kinetic process. 

I already run a baseline with empty pans and the scan was subtracted from the curve I shared.

Hi Tunji, I wonder why the baseline is pointing downwards then. Because of the temperature dependence of the heat capacity the baseline should point somewhat upwards, but never steep downwards. Did you take the same type of crucible with the same mass as from the sample run?  Regards, Günther Höhne.

Prof. Gunther,

I have used the same crucible for both baseline and sample runs; I am grateful for your help.

Tunji