4.6 Article

Structural analysis and evaluation of surface tension of silicate melts containing CaO and FexO

Journal

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE
Volume 245, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2021.116870

Keywords

Estimation model; Surface tension; Structure; Silicate melt

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51974075, 51674069]
  2. Open Funds of State Key Laboratory of Metal Material for Marine Equipment and Application [SKLMEA-K202001]
  3. National Key R & D Program of China [2017YFC0805100]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, 22 samples of the CaO-SiO2-FexO system were investigated using Raman spectroscopy to develop a structure-based surface tension estimation model for silicate melts. The model demonstrated reasonable agreement with experimental values, outperforming Tanaka's model for the system and its subsystems in accuracy.
The surface tension of silicate melts is a key property in liquid steel refining. Accurate estimation of surface tension can provide guidance for the design of slag composition and the control of the smelting process. In this study, 22 samples of the CaO-SiO2-FexO system were investigated by Raman spectroscopy to obtain the mole fraction of oxygen bonds, and structural data were interpolated to obtain the oxygen bond database within the compositional range. Based on spectral analysis, the formation mechanism of surface tension for the silicate melt was elaborated from the perspective of microstructure, and then a structure-based surface tension estimation model was developed for the present system. The root-mean-square error of the present model was 0.055 N.m(-1), indicating reasonable agreement between the predicted and experimental values, and the present estimation model had higher accuracy than Tanaka's model for the CaO-SiO2-FexO system and its subsystems. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available