2015
DOI: 10.1080/14786435.2015.1118572
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling temperature and concentration dependent solid/liquid interfacial energies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The composition and temperature dependence of is calculated by the thermodynamic model proposed by Granasy and Tegze [51,52], considering both the melting enthalpy and melting entropy:…”
Section: Thermodynamic Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The composition and temperature dependence of is calculated by the thermodynamic model proposed by Granasy and Tegze [51,52], considering both the melting enthalpy and melting entropy:…”
Section: Thermodynamic Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While for pure Al, was determined indirectly by measuring the solid-liquid interfacial energy using homogeneous nucleation theory [81] or dihedral angle approach [82]. If the maximum value of (188 mJ/m 2 [83] Rettenmayr [52], the shape of the grain boundary grooves would be influenced by the limited cooling rates by using the radial heat flow apparatus [80]. Another limitation for the grain boundary groove method [52] is that segregation will happen during long time holding which is required for the grain boundary groove experiments.…”
Section: Comparing To the Experimental Data Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, it is not straightforward to discuss the change in solid–liquid interfacial energy out of the equilibrium condition. Specifically, the temperature dependence of the solid–liquid interfacial energy is still under discussion [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Several theoretical and computational studies have reported that the solid–liquid interface increased with increasing temperature (i.e., the positive temperature dependence) [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ], whereas other literature has indicated that the temperature dependence of solid–liquid interfacial energy was not monotonic [ 39 , 40 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, the temperature dependence of the solid–liquid interfacial energy is still under discussion [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Several theoretical and computational studies have reported that the solid–liquid interface increased with increasing temperature (i.e., the positive temperature dependence) [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ], whereas other literature has indicated that the temperature dependence of solid–liquid interfacial energy was not monotonic [ 39 , 40 ]. Different temperature dependencies for the interfacial energy of an unstable equilibrium (i.e., for nuclei) have been theoretically predicted [ 41 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%