Corrigendum to “Thermodynamic assessment of the Al–P system based on original experimental data” [Calphad 42 (2013) 76–85

Abstract

The original article contains the following errors. Using the thermodynamic parameters given in the original Table 4, the calculated lines of partial pressures and total pressure, shown in the original Figs. 6 and 7, respectively, will appear shifted to the left, to about 15 K higher temperature. All other calculated values are consistent with the original parameter set. That embarrassing error occurred because parameters from two separate datasets were confused. The correct parameter set is shown below in the replacement part for Table 4. The reason for the shifted pressure/temperature lines in Figs. 6 and 7 was the wrong value of entropy related parameter in G Al:P (289.06T instead of 293.45T). Therefore, the value of the absolute entropy of AlP given in Table 3 must also be corrected to read S298(AlP)1⁄4 18 J K 1 mol-atoms . There are no experimental data to compare to this value. Since the correct parameter set in Table 4 also involve different parameters of the liquid phase, the phase diagrams shown in the original Figs. 1, 2, 4, and 5 must also be replaced by the correct figures and the captions given below. The calculated congruent melting temperature in Fig. 1 is 2360 1C and this value replaces the value of 2522 1C in Table 5. However, as explained in detail in our original paper, the only “experimental value 2530750 1C” could not be accepted. In Fig. 2 the difference between the calculation from the correct parameter set and the original figure is almost not visible on the graph and the accepted experimental data are equally well reproduced. According to the correct dataset, the L1⁄4(Al)þAlP eutectic reaction occurs at 660.3 1C with compositions [P]Liquid1⁄434 ppm P and [P](Al)1⁄40.07 ppm P; only the liquid composition differs from the value of 40 ppm which should be replaced in the original Table 5. In Fig. 4 the LþAlPþGas equilibrium is calculated at somewhat lower temperature, however, there are no experimental data to compare to. In Fig. 5 the congruent sublimation point of AlP at 10 6 bar is calculated at 1102 1C. That is exactly 15 K below the value given in the original Fig. 5 and, therefore, in perfect agreement with the calculated line and the experimental data in the correct and unchanged original Fig. 7. The only detail to be noted in Figs. 6 and 7 is that the calculated congruent sublimation line ends at 1332 1C (1 10 4 bar) instead of 1480 1C (3.2 10 4 bar).