Evolution of Anode Porosity under Air Oxidation: The Unveiling of the Active Pore Size
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The carbon anode, used in aluminum electrolysis (Hall–Héroult process), is over-consumed by air oxidation and carboxy-reaction (with CO2). Several anode features may affect this over-consumption, such as impurity content, graphitization level and anode porosity features (e.g., porosity volume fraction or pore size distribution). The two first parameters are basically related to the quality of raw materials and coke calcination conditions. Anode porosity is, however, greatly affected by anode manufacturing conditions, and is possible to be modified, to some extent, by adjusting the anode recipe and the processing parameters. This work aims to investigate the effect of anode porosity on its air reactivity. Baked anode samples were prepared in laboratory scale and then crushed into powder form (−4760 + 4000 µm). The recipe for anode preparation was similar to a typical industrial recipe, except that in the lab scale no butt particles were used in the recipe. Anode particles were then gasified at six different conversion levels (0, 5, 15, 25, 35 and 50 wt %) under air at 525 °C. The porosity was characterized in several pore size ranges, measured by nitrogen adsorption and mercury intrusion (0.0014–0.020, 0.002–0.025, 0.025–0.100, 0.1–40.0 and superior at 40 µm). The volume variation of each pore range, as a function of carbon conversion, was assessed and used to determine the size of the most active pores for air oxidation. The most active pore size was found to be the pores inferior at 40 µm before 15 wt % of gasification and pores superior at 40 µm between 15 and 50 wt % of carbon conversion. Limitation of pore size range could be used as an additional guideline, along with other targets such as high homogeneity and density, to set the optimum anode manufacturing parameters.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".