1971
DOI: 10.1051/metal/197168100635
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

rôle des phénomènes superficiels dans le mécanisme d’élimination des inclusions solides

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

1988
1988
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To optimize the steelmaking processes, knowledge of physical growth of the inclusions resulting from agglomeration is essential. In line with this direction, several studies [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] have been carried out to study and model the agglomeration of inclusions. However, understanding of the physical growth of inclusions in liquid steel is still limited.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To optimize the steelmaking processes, knowledge of physical growth of the inclusions resulting from agglomeration is essential. In line with this direction, several studies [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] have been carried out to study and model the agglomeration of inclusions. However, understanding of the physical growth of inclusions in liquid steel is still limited.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The thermodynamics of inclusion removal has been described in a number of papers. [3][4][5][6][7] For an inclusion to be removed it is necessary for it to travel through the slag/metal interface and on into the slag phase. In terms of interfacial energies, a favorable separation will be achieved, from a thermodynamic viewpoint, when the sum of changes in the various terms related to interfacial energies is favorable.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 10(b) shows that the rupture energy increases slowly with increasing contact angle to 120°, thereafter it increases sharply with contact angle. This can explain why the clustering of Al 2 O 3 is more severe compared with SiO 2 (115°), 55) ZrO 2 (122°) 52) and MgO (125°).…”
Section: Influence Of Surface Tension Contact Angle Andmentioning
confidence: 84%