FeY: enthalpy of formation

9 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 1, model 8); OQMD 0.618 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-1435280).

Systems: Fe–Y

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of FeY reported in the literature (9)
ValuePhase as printedT (K)ClassMethodSystemSourceLocationQuote
-5.3 per mol-atomFeY973experimentalInterpolationFe–Y[1] Kardellass 2014
cites Subramanian 1984 doi
Table 4, p. 4, row 23
report
-12.5 kJ/mol-atomFeY298.15modelPrediction (b)Fe–Y[2] Saenko 2017
cites Watson 1984 doi
Table 5, p. 12, row 42
report
-9.4 kJ/mol-atomFeY973modelInterpolationFe–Y[2] Saenko 2017
cites Kardellass 2014 doi
Table 5, p. 12, row 45
report
-9 per mol-atomFeY973modelInterpolationFe–Y[1] Kardellass 2014Table 4, p. 4, row 24
report
-8.8 kJ/mol-atomFeY973modelInterpolationFe–Y[2] Saenko 2017
cites Kardellass 2014 doi
Table 5, p. 12, row 46
report
-5.9 kJ/mol-atomFeY0modelInterpolationFe–Y[2] Saenko 2017
cites Mihalkovic 2004 doi
Table 5, p. 12, row 40
report
-5.8 kJ/mol-atomFeY973modelInterpolationFe–Y[2] Saenko 2017Table 5, p. 12, row 44
report
-5.3 kJ/mol-atomFeY973modelInterpolationFe–Y[2] Saenko 2017
cites Subramanian 1984 doi
Table 5, p. 12, row 43
report
-2 kJ/mol-atomFeY298.15modelPrediction (a)Fe–Y[2] Saenko 2017
cites Niessen 1983 doi
Table 5, p. 12, row 41
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.

Uncertainty budget of the literature values of FeY
ValueUnitPrintedReadingMethod (class, basis)CompositionScatterConversionEffective
-5.3per mol-atom0.05unit 'per mol-atom' not convertible to kJ/mol-atomunit 'per mol-atom' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom
-12.5kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-9.4kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-9per mol-atom0.5unit 'per mol-atom' not convertible to kJ/mol-atomunit 'per mol-atom' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom
-8.8kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-5.9kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-5.8kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-5.3kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-2kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9

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.

DFT formation energy of FeY
SourceEntrykJ/mol-atomeV/atomSpace groupE above hull (kJ/mol-atom)E above hull (eV/atom)Theoretical
OQMDoqmd-14352800.6180.006405Cmcm5.17540.0536yes

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

  1. S. Kardellass, C. Servant, N. Selhaoui, A. Iddaoudi, M. Ait Amar, L. Bouirden, A thermodynamic assessment of the iron–yttrium system, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 583, 598-606 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2013.07.010
  2. I. Saenko, O. Fabrichnaya, A. Udovsky, New Thermodynamic Assessment of the Fe-Y System, J. Phase Equilib. Diffus. 38, 684-699 (2017). doi:10.1007/s11669-017-0574-3