4.7 Article

Molecular dynamics simulations of the structural properties and electrical conductivities of CaO-MgO-Al2O3-SiO2 melts

期刊

JOURNAL OF NON-CRYSTALLINE SOLIDS
卷 452, 期 -, 页码 194-202

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2016.08.042

关键词

Aluminosilicate; Molecular dynamics; Structural properties; Diffusion; Electrical conductivity

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF) [IFR1203100525]
  2. DST-NRF Professional Development Program (PDP) scholarship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The structural properties and electrical conductivities of nine CaO-MgO-Al2O3-SiO2 slags with compositions in the peralkaline region have been calculated using molecular dynamics simulations. The proportion of nonbridging oxygen (NBO) and bridging oxygen (BO) atoms were determined from simulation and shown to be in reasonable agreement with theoretical prediction. Bridging oxygen atoms were classified into Si-O-Si, Si-O-Al or Al-O-Al linkages and the results used to establish whether the Al avoidance principle is applicable. The number of bridging oxygens coordinated to tetrahedral [SiO4](4-) and [AlO4](5-) units, namely the Q(n) distribution, was determined. Although a good comparison to the theoretical average Q was found at low basicity, at higher basicity greater deviation was seen. Electrical conductivities, taking cross-correlations into account, were in excellent agreement with experimentally measured values, although Nernst-Einstein conductivities, estimated from self-diffusion coefficients alone, showed large deviations. Molecular dynamics simulations are therefore able to reliably predict conductivity, but values calculated indirectly, i.e. using the Nemst-Einstein relationship, should be used with care. At low basicity theoretical predictions of structural disorder, based on Zachariasen's Random Network Model, are in reasonable agreement with simulation, but this agreement worsens as the proportion of network modifying cations increases. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据