Abstract
In this work the Deal‐Grove (DG) oxidation model, being the key ingredient in many current oxidation models, has been examined in detail from the physical and numerical point of view. It is clearly proven that for a rather broad range of (B/A, B) combinations the fitting error is smaller than the experimental error. So there exists a wide range of allowable parameters of the Deal‐Grove model to satisfy different physical explanations. This means that a good fit alone is not a sufficient criterion to validate a possible physical model. It is also demonstrated that the existence of breakpoints in the temperature behavior could be seen as an artifact of the model parameters extraction procedure normally used. Therefore, a new and efficient parameter extraction strategy, which carefully considers the influence of experimental errors, is suggested in this work. As an example, a physically acceptable expression for the parameters in the is found as a substitute for the look‐up table used in SUPREM‐3.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
