TiB<sub>2</sub>-Coated Graphite As Wettable Cathode for Al Production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from aluminum smelters will only be achieved with the emergence of new technologies. The most effective way to decrease significantly CO2 emissions from this industry is to replace the consumable carbon anodes that are used nowadays with so-called inert anodes that emit O2 instead of CO2 during Al electrolysis [1]. However, the implementation of inert anodes in Al smelters will induce an increase of the cell voltage, which could be compensated by reducing the cell ohmic drop by decreasing the anode-to-cathode distance. For that purpose, the thickness of the molten Al layer presents on the surface of the cathode must be minimized, which requires a high wettability of molten Al on the cathode. To date, the most promising cathode material is TiB2, which has an excellent Al wettability, good electrical conductivity and good chemical stability under Al electrolysis conditions. However, the manufacturing of bulk TiB2 electrodes at the industrial scale poses challenges. Sintering of TiB2 must be performed at high temperature (~2000°C), which induces significant crystal growth that has dramatic consequences on the mechanical properties of the electrode. Faced with these constraints, various consolidation methods operating at lower temperatures have been evaluated (sintering under pressure, spark plasma sintering...), but they are expensive and/or poorly adapted to the production of large electrodes of complex shape as required for Al electrolysis application. In the present study, new avenues based on the elaboration of TiB2 coated graphite cathodes by electrochemical and thermal spray methods are evaluated. The influence of the deposition conditions on the crystalline structure, morphology, mechanical resistance and Al wettability of TiB2 coatings will be presented in this communication.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".