Reference Data for the Density, Viscosity, and Surface Tension of Liquid Al–Zn, Ag–Sn, Bi–Sn, Cu–Sn, and Sn–Zn Eutectic Alloys

IF 4.4 2区工程技术 Q2 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data Pub Date : 2018-02-22 DOI:10.1063/1.5010151

A. Dobosz, T. Gancarz

引用次数: 22

Abstract

The data for the physicochemical properties viscosity, density, and surface tension obtained by different experimental techniques have been analyzed for liquid Al–Zn, Ag–Sn, Bi–Sn, Cu–Sn, and Sn–Zn eutectic alloys. All experimental data sets have been categorized and described by the year of publication, the technique used to obtain the data, the purity of the samples and their compositions, the quoted uncertainty, the number of data in the data set, the form of data, and the temperature range. The proposed standard deviations of liquid eutectic Al–Zn, Ag–Sn, Bi–Sn, Cu–Sn, and Sn–Zn alloys are 0.8%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 0.2%, and 0.1% for the density, 8.7%, 4.1%, 3.6%, 5.1%, and 4.0% for viscosity, and 1.0%, 0.5%, 0.3%, N/A, and 0.4% for surface tension, respectively, at a confidence level of 95%.

查看原文本刊更多论文

液体Al-Zn、Ag-Sn、Bi-Sn、Cu-Sn和Sn-Zn共晶合金的密度、粘度和表面张力参考数据

用不同的实验方法对液态Al-Zn、Ag-Sn、Bi-Sn、Cu-Sn和Sn-Zn共晶合金的理化性能、粘度、密度和表面张力进行了分析。所有实验数据集都按照发表年份、获取数据的技术、样品纯度及其成分、引用的不确定度、数据集中数据的数量、数据的形式和温度范围进行了分类和描述。液相共晶Al-Zn、Ag-Sn、Bi-Sn、Cu-Sn和Sn-Zn合金的密度标准差分别为0.8%、0.1%、0.5%、0.2%和0.1%，粘度标准差分别为8.7%、4.1%、3.6%、5.1%和4.0%，表面张力标准差分别为1.0%、0.5%、0.3%、N/A和0.4%，置信水平为95%。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data 化学-化学综合

CiteScore

6.90

自引率

11.60%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data (JPCRD) is published by AIP Publishing for the U.S. Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The journal provides critically evaluated physical and chemical property data, fully documented as to the original sources and the criteria used for evaluation, preferably with uncertainty analysis. Critical reviews may also be included if they document a reference database, review the data situation in a field, review reference-quality measurement techniques, or review data evaluation methods.