1990
DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/ddf.66-69.295
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diffusion in Liquid Alloys under Microgravity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
1

Year Published

1999
1999
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
20
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The lack of diffusion experiments in liquid metallic alloys is mainly due to the fact, that even low velocities of convective fluid flow change diffusive transport into convecto-diffusive transport. Up to now, the best method to avoid buoyancy driven convection is to perform diffusivity measurements in microgravity using the sheer cell technique, as discussed by Praisey [47], and Frohberg et al [48]. Recently Garandet et al [49] and Botton et al [50] proposed an alternative to microgravity experiments for electrically conducting liquids based on magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) damping of fluid flow in a uniform magnetic field.…”
Section: Multicomponent Diffusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lack of diffusion experiments in liquid metallic alloys is mainly due to the fact, that even low velocities of convective fluid flow change diffusive transport into convecto-diffusive transport. Up to now, the best method to avoid buoyancy driven convection is to perform diffusivity measurements in microgravity using the sheer cell technique, as discussed by Praisey [47], and Frohberg et al [48]. Recently Garandet et al [49] and Botton et al [50] proposed an alternative to microgravity experiments for electrically conducting liquids based on magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) damping of fluid flow in a uniform magnetic field.…”
Section: Multicomponent Diffusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The currently available data, where they exist at all, are often widely inaccurate, the published values for any particular liquid metal diffusion coefficient differing by 50–100%. This is primarily due to the influence of buoyancy‐driven convection on the experimental system used to obtain the coefficient 2–4 . Most of these experiments have used the long capillary diffusion couple, and in order to reduce convective transport, the diameters of the capillaries have been progressively decreased.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is suggested that for the 0.8 mm capillary, convective currents are localized resulting in some scatter of the concentrations but transport of liquid metal along the length of the capillary is small and does not contribute significantly to the diffusion coefficient. Frohberg et al, [14] using 2 mm diameter capillaries, noted similar concentration variations for In-In 25% Sn diffusion couples that they attributed to convection. However, in their case significant mass transport due to convection did occur increasing the apparent diffusion coefficient by 15 to 30% over zero-gravity results.…”
Section: Basic and Applied Research: Section Imentioning
confidence: 60%