Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T21:31:53.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A thermodynamic analysis of the system anorthite-åkermanite

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

E. Christiaan de Wys*
Affiliation:
International Business Machines Corporation, Kingston, New York, U.S.A.

Summary

From thermodynamic considerations of the system anorthite-åkermanite it appears that the melts in this system are ionic in nature. The liquidus relation in this system would thus seem to afford confirmation of the theory, based on conductivity measurements, that silicate melts such as molten anorthite dissociate into such ions as Ca2+ and (Al2Si2O8)2−.

Further thermodynamic calculations involving no unreasonable assumption lead to a close reproduction of the experimental liquidus curve of åkermanite. This lends added strength to the belief in the stable existence of åkermanite down to the eutectic; no evidence in support of the claim that åkermanes becomes unstable below 1 325° C. (Osborn and Schairer, 1941) was encountered.

According to Osborn et al. (1954) the presence of substantial Ca2+ increases the desulphurizing potential of blast furnace slag. The thermodynamic treatment of the binary system anorthite-åkermanite leads to the conclusion that both phases dissociate in the molten state and in mutual solution to yield Ca2+; it therefore appears probable that a high concentration of these minerals in the slag would have a salutary effect on the slag chemistry.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1960

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barth, (T. F. W.) and Rosenquist, (T.), 1949. Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. 247, p. 316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, (H.), 1951. Trans. Soc. Glass Techn., 35. p. 304.Google Scholar
Bockris, (J. O. H.), Kitchener, (J.A.), Ignatowicz, (S.), and Tomlinson, (J.W.), 1948. Discuss. Faraday Soc. vol. 4, p. 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darken, (L.) and Gurry, (R.), 1953. Physical Chemistry of Metals. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.Google Scholar
De Wys, (E.C.) and Foster, (W.R.), 1956. Journ. Amer. Ceram. Soc., vol. 39, p. 372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wys, (E.C.) and Foster, (W.R.), 1958. Min. Mag., vol. 31, p. 736.Google Scholar
Doelter, (C.), 1907. Monats. Chem., vol. 28, p. 1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doelter, (C.), 1908. Ibid., vol. 29, 13. 607.Google Scholar
Eitel, (W.), 1954. The Physical Chemistry of the Silicates. Univ. Chicago Press, p. 47.Google Scholar
Ervih, (G.) and Osborn, (A.F.), 1949. Amer. Min., vol. 34, p. 717.Google Scholar
Evans, (R.C.), 1952. An Introduction to Crystal Chemistry. Univ. Press, Cambridge, p. 241.Google Scholar
Farup, (F.), Fleischer, (W.), and Holtan, (F.), 1924. Chim. et Ind., vol. 12, p. 11.Google Scholar
Goranson, (R.W.), 1942. Geol. Soc. Amer., Special Paper 36.Google Scholar
Koch, (L.), 1933. Neues Jahrb. Min., Beil-Bd. 67, Abt. A, p. 401.Google Scholar
Martin, (A.E.) and Derge, (G.), 1943. Trans. Amer. Inst. Mining Met. Eng., vol. 154, p. 104.Google Scholar
McCaffery, (R.S.), Oesterle, (J.R.), and Schapiro, (L.), 1927. Amer. Inst. Mining Met. Eng., Techn. Publ. no. 19, p. 1.Google Scholar
Osborn, (E.F.), de Vries, (R.C.), Gee, (K.H.), and Kraner, (H.H.), 1954. Journ. Metals, vol. 6, p. 33.Google Scholar
Osborn, (E.F.) and Schairer, (J.F.), 1941. Amer. Journ. Sci., vol 239, p. 715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, (A.T.), 1954. Joum. Amer. Ceram. Soc., vol. 37, p. 402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prutton, (C.F.) and Maron, (S.), 1951. Fundamental Principles of Physical Chemistry. MacMillan Co., New York, p. 193.Google Scholar
Wagner, (C.), 1952. Thermodynamics of Alloys. Addison-Wesley Press Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar