CuZr: enthalpy of formation
17 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 8, model 4, DFT 5); experimental median -19.59 kJ/mol-atom (n = 8); Materials Project -12.296 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaacjlri); OQMD -12.626 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-756640).
Systems: Cu–Zr
Literature values
| Value | Phase as printed | T (K) | Class | Method | System | Source | Location | Quote |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -24.4 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr-B2 | 298.15 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [1] Zhou 2010 cites Ansara 1982 | Table 2, p. 3, row 16 report | ||
| -24.4 kJ/mol-atom ± 0.96 | CuZr | 298.15 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [2] Turchanin 2008 cites Ansara 1982 doi | Table 3, p. 10, row 16 report | ||
| -24.4 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr | 298.15 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [3] Zeng 1994 cites Ansara 1982 doi | Table 1, p. 1, row 18 report | ||
| -24 kJ/mol-atom ± 2 | CuZr | 298.15 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [2] Turchanin 2008 cites Sidorov 1989 | Table 3, p. 10, row 17 report | ||
| -15.179 kJ/mol-atom ± 0.309 | CuZr | 1123 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [2] Turchanin 2008 cites Zaitsev 2003 doi | Table 3, p. 10, row 19 report | ||
| -9.05 kJ/mol-atom ± 1.18 | CuZr | 298.15 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [2] Turchanin 2008 cites Kleppa 1982 doi | Table 3, p. 10, row 18 report | ||
| -9.05 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr-B2 | 298.15 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [1] Zhou 2010 cites Kleppa 1982 | Table 2, p. 3, row 17 report | ||
| -9.05 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr | 298.15 | experimental | Cu–Zr | [3] Zeng 1994 cites Kleppa 1982 doi | Table 1, p. 1, row 17 report | ||
| -24.012 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr | model | Cu–Zr | [3] Zeng 1994 cites Saunders 1985 doi | Table 1, p. 1, row 14 report | |||
| -17.014 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr | 1123 | model | Cu–Zr | [2] Turchanin 2008 | Table 3, p. 10, row 20 report | ||
| -10.0521 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr | model | Cu–Zr | [3] Zeng 1994 | Table 1, p. 1, row 16 report | |||
| -7.33717 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr | model | Cu–Zr | [3] Zeng 1994 cites Luoma 1991 | Table 1, p. 1, row 15 report | |||
| -12.71 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr-B2 | 0 | DFT | USPP-GGA | Cu–Zr | [1] Zhou 2010 cites Ghosh 2007 | Table 2, p. 3, row 15 report | |
| -12.13 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr-B33 | 0 | DFT | PAW-GGA | Cu–Zr | [1] Zhou 2010 cites Zhou 2008 | Table 2, p. 3, row 18 report | |
| -11.97 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr-B19' | 0 | DFT | PAW-GGA | Cu–Zr | [1] Zhou 2010 cites Zhou 2008 | Table 2, p. 3, row 19 report | |
| -10.58 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr-B2 | 0 | DFT | PAW-GGA | Cu–Zr | [1] Zhou 2010 | Table 2, p. 3, row 13 report | |
| -10.53 kJ/mol-atom | CuZr-B2 | 0 | DFT | PAW-GGA | Cu–Zr | [1] Zhou 2010 cites Ghosh 2007 | Table 2, p. 3, row 14 report |
Uncertainty budget
Components kept separate, in the value's unit (literature SCHEMA.md, UNCERTAINTY_CALIBRATION.md): effective = max(sqrt(max(printed, reading, method)^2 + composition^2 + conversion^2), scatter). The method floor is the robust between-study scatter of the method class in ORCHID (calibrated) or a documented prior; printed values and printed uncertainties are unchanged.
| Value | Unit | Printed | Reading | Method (class, basis) | Composition | Scatter | Conversion | Effective |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -24.4 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.05 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -24.4 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.96 | 5.000e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 8.749 | 8.749 | ||
| -24.4 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -24 | kJ/mol-atom | 2 | 5.000e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 8.749 | 8.749 | ||
| -15.179 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.309 | 4.392e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 8.749 | 0.2103 | 8.749 | |
| -9.05 | kJ/mol-atom | 1.18 | 5.000e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 8.749 | 8.749 | ||
| -9.05 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.005 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -9.05 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -24.012 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -17.014 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -10.0521 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -7.33717 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -12.71 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.005 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -12.13 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.005 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -11.97 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.005 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -10.58 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.005 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -10.53 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.005 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 |
DFT formation energies
Lowest-energy entries at this composition. Materials Project and OQMD use different energy references and are never averaged. 1 eV/atom = 96.485 kJ/mol-atom.
| Source | Entry | kJ/mol-atom | eV/atom | Space group | E above hull (kJ/mol-atom) | E above hull (eV/atom) | Theoretical |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Materials Project | mp-aaaaadha | -10.392 | -0.107705 | Pm-3m | 4.075 | 0.0422 | no |
| Materials Project | mp-aaacjlri | -12.296 | -0.127435 | Cm | 2.1714 | 0.0225 | no |
| OQMD | oqmd-116222 | -10.297 | -0.106722 | Pm-3m | 4.3766 | 0.0454 | no |
| OQMD | oqmd-756640 | -12.626 | -0.130864 | Pbcm | 2.0472 | 0.0212 | yes |
DFT sources: A. Jain et al., Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation, APL Materials 1 (2013) 011002. doi:10.1063/1.4812323 (CC BY 4.0); J. E. Saal et al., JOM 65 (2013) 1501-1509; S. Kirklin et al., npj Comput. Mater. 1 (2015) 15010. doi:10.1007/s11837-013-0755-4 (CC BY 4.0);
Sources
- S.H. Zhou, R.E. Napolitano, Phase stability for the Cu–Zr system: First-principles, experiments and solution-based modeling, Acta Materialia 58, 2186-2196 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2009.12.004
- M. A. Turchanin, P. G. Agraval, A. R. Abdulov, Thermodynamic assessment of the Cu-Ti-Zr system. II. Cu-Zr and Ti-Zr systems, Powder Metall Met Ceram 47, 428-446 (2008). doi:10.1007/s11106-008-9039-x
- K. J. Zeng, M. Hämäläinen, H. L. Lukas, A new thermodynamic description of the Cu-Zr system, JPE 15, 577-586 (1994). doi:10.1007/bf02647618