P.
Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis
Peter Waldner
Department of General, Analytical and Physical Chemistry, University of Leoben, Austria
Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys:
A thermodynamic analysis
Gibbs energy modeling for sulfur solving liquid and solid
iron–chromium phases with body- and face-centered cubic
structure has been carried out using a substitutional ap-
proach. Experimental data available from the literature on
sulfur potentials in the temperature range 1 525 to 1 755 8C
for the liquid metallic phase and 1 000 to 1 300 8C for the sol-
id alloys have been taken into consideration. Recent thermo-
dynamic evaluations of the Fe–S and Cr–S binary subsys-
tems served as basis for the presented work. The obtained
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.
models allow a satisfactory reproduction of the majority of
the sulfur potential data as well as the prediction of an iso-
thermal partial section at 1 300 8C. Consistent embedding of
the optimized Gibbs energies within a recent thermodynamic
modeling of the complete Cr–Fe–S system is achieved.
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.
Keywords: Chromium; Iron; Sulfur; Chromium–iron–sul-
fur system; Solubility; Thermodynamic modeling
1. Introduction
The sulfur solubility of chromium alloyed steels represents
an important physico-chemical property with respect to
high-temperature behavior in sulfuric environments since
the solubility maximum indicates the possible formation of
sulfides as corrosion products, that is, the occurrence of
hot corrosion. The mutual thermodynamic interaction of al-
loying elements as chromium and sulfur in liquid steels is of
interest from a metallurgical point of view. Both fields, ma-
terial science and metallurgy, can benefit from a thorough
thermodynamic analysis of the sulfur solubility of liquid
and solid chromium–iron alloys as a contribution to the de-
velopment of a thermodynamic multicomponent/-phase da-
tabase for metal–sulfur systems.
In the framework of their thermodynamic evaluation of
the Fe–FeS–CrS–Cr system, Oikawa et al. [1] modeled
Gibbs energies of the ternary liquid and alloy phases with
body-centered (bcc) and face-centered (fcc) structure using
two-sublattice models. According to [1] and recent thermo-
dynamic evaluations of the Fe–S and Cr–S binary systems
by Waldner and Pelton [2] and Waldner and Sitte [3], re-
spectively, the sulfur solubility of pure Fe and Cr with bcc
structure is larger than that of pure Fe with fcc structure. In
contrast to [1] a substitutional approach in the liquid and
solid state was selected and could be successfully applied
by [2, 3]. In a subsequent thermodynamic description of
the complete ternary Cr–Fe–S system all known system
phases were taken into consideration by Waldner [4] within
a thermodynamic analysis of phase equilibria and thermo-
352
dynamic data at 1 bar total pressure over the entire compo-
sition range between 298.15 K (25 8C) and temperatures
above the liquidus.
The present study focuses on the ternary region close to
the metallic binary subsystem Cr–Fe. It should be investi-
gated whether Gibbs energy models for the liquid and solid
alloy phases, recently successfully developed by [2 – 4], are
also useful for reproducing experimental data which are
related to the diluted regime along the binary subsystem
Cr–Fe. Due to the limited sulfur solubility of the binary al-
loy phases no strong effect on ternary phase equilibria with
respect to the phase boundaries of sulfide phases was to be
expected. As a result the thermodynamic analysis of experi-
mental data from the literature on sulfur activities in ternary
alloys was reserved for the present study which aims at the
extension of the models for the binary alloy phases from
[2, 3] by a consistent embedding in the recent thermody-
namic assessment of the complete Cr–Fe–S system [4].
2. Experimental data
Experimental data on sulfur partial pressure and phase equi-
libria of diluted Fe–Cr alloys have been reported in the lit-
erature by various publications which are reported here
chronologically for the liquid and subsequently for the solid
state.
Griffing and Healy [5] studied the activity coefficient of
sulfur in Cr–Fe–S melts by measuring the equilibrium par-
tial pressures of H2S and H2 at 1 600, 1 625 and 1 760 8C.
Using the same gas equilibration technique with H2S/H2
gaseous mixtures Adachi and Morita [6] studied the influ-
ence of chromium on the activity of sulfur in liquid Fe–Cr
alloys at 1 650 8C. In the framework of investigating the im-
pact of various alloying elements on the thermodynamics of
sulfur in liquid iron Ban-ya and Chipman [7] reported on
sulfur solubilities in iron–chromium melts studying the het-
erogeneous reaction S(solved in alloy) + H2(g) = H2S(g) at
1 550 8C. Dondelinger et al. [8] determined the effect of
chromium on the activity coefficient of sulfur in liquid
Fe–Cr–S alloys in the temperature range 1 525 to 1 755 8C
using a levitation melting technique in H2–H2S atmo-
spheres.
In the communication by Josey and Floridis [9] solubility
data of sulfur in a solid Fe-10Cr (wt.%) alloy were given for
1 000 8C. The experimental procedure consisted in equili-
brating Fe–X specimens alloyed with X = chromium, cop-
per, nickel and vanadium with a sulfur containing atmo-
sphere. The solubility of sulfur in solid Fe–Cr alloys was
studied by Grolière and Barbouth [10] and Estager and Bar-
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4
 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis
bouth [11] by means of the gas equilibration method with
H2S/H2 mixtures of controlled composition. Experiments
were carried out at different temperatures from 985 and
1 200 8C where the amount of sulfur solved in the solid solu-
tions was determined radio-chemically using the sulfur iso-
tope 35S. Fujisawa et al. [12] performed gas circulation with
H2S/H2 mixtures determining activities of sulfur in equili-
brated Cr–Fe alloys. An isothermal section of the Cr–Fe–S
system at 1 300 8C containing alloy/sulfide phase equilibria
was derived.
3. Thermodynamic modeling
The CALPHAD [13] approach is applied to model Gibbs
energy expressions of liquid and solid alloy phases of the
Cr–Fe–S system as a function of temperature and composi-
tion evaluating and optimizing critically experimental data
available in the literature. Due to the lack of experimental
data valid for other pressure conditions the Gibbs energy
functions of all condensed phases are related to a total pres-
sure of one bar. The Gibbs energy for the gas phase applied
in this study is described on the basis of the model of ideal
gas phase mixtures.
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.
All computations necessary in this work were performed
using the thermodynamic software package FactSage [14]
which was specifically designed for the calculation of ther-
modynamic properties and phase equilibria of multi-com-
ponent/-phase chemical systems.
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.
3.1. The liquid alloy phase
The Gibbs energy modeled for the liquid phase by [4]
proved to describe thermodynamic properties and ternary
phase equilibria of the Cr–Fe–S system over the entire com-
position range from room up to liquidus temperature satis-
factorily using one ternary interaction parameter. Computa-
tions in this work show that without additional parameters a
large body of sulfur activity data in the dilute region of
Cr–Fe liquid solutions can be predicted. As a result the
Gibbs energy model by [4], to which the reader is referred
to for a detailed description is accepted for this work.
3.2. Solid alloy phases
Two solid alloy phases with body-centered (bcc) and face-
centered (fcc) cubic structure occur in the Cr–Fe–S system.
The metallic phases were treated as substitutional solutions
for modeling the mutual solubility of the metal atoms [15].
The sulfur solubility in pure iron (bcc and fcc) and chro-
mium (bcc) was successfully described by a substitutional
approach [2, 3] as well. As a consequence Gibbs energy
modeling for the ternary solid alloy solutions with bcc and
fcc structure can be based on the corresponding functions
of the binary subsystems combining and extending them to-
gether in a single expression for the ternary fcc or bcc solu-
tion phase. A general expression for both solid solution
phases results in following function for the molar Gibbs en-
ergy:
Gm ¼ xCr G0Cr þ xFe G0Fe þ xS G0S
þ RT ðxCr ln xCr þ xFe ln xFe þ xS ln xS Þ þ Gex
m ð1Þ
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4
where G0Cr and G0Fe are the standard molar Gibbs energies of
the pure solid chromium and iron phases in their corre-
sponding structures. G0S is the standard molar Gibbs energy
of pure hypothetical solid sulfur with bcc or fcc structure
which played the role of an adjustable model parameter in
the studies for the binary systems [2, 3]. Equation (1) con-
tains the molar excess Gibbs energy Gex m which models all
first nearest neighbor interaction energies occurring in the
three binary subsystems as well as ternary interactions as a
function of temperature and composition:
X
Gex
m ¼ xS xCr
n
LðCr;SÞ ðxS xCr Þn
n 0
X
þ xS xFe n
LðFe;SÞ ðxS xFe Þn
n 0
X
þ xCr xFe n
LðCr;FeÞ ðxCr xFe Þn ð2Þ
n 0
þ xCr xFe xS ðLFe Cr S
ðCr;Fe;SÞ xFe þ LðCr;Fe;SÞ xCr þ LðCr;Fe;SÞ xS Þ
The first three summation terms according to Redlich–Kis-
ter expressions stem from the binary modeling studies [2,
3, 15] and their addition results in a Muggianu model [16]
for extrapolation from the three binaries into the ternary
system. In addition the fourth term according to Hillert
[17] with three distinct adjustable model parameters offers
the possibility to account for ternary interactions which
can be functions of temperature. According to the modeling
calculations it turned out that for the Gibbs energy of the
bcc alloy phase the first two parameters, LFe –1
ðCr;Fe;SÞ /J mol =
Cr –1
–68 168.78 and LðCr;Fe;SÞ /J mol = –995 552.15, and for the
Gibbs energy of the fcc alloy phase the first one as tempe-
rature dependent, LFe –1
ðCr;Fe;SÞ /J mol = 718 768.13 – 645.39 T,
are relevant for this study.
Since the sigma-phase, an intermediate metallic com-
pound in the binary Cr–Fe system, shows negligible sulfur
solubility no treatment of its Gibbs energy given by Lee
[18] and accepted in [4] was necessary here.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Comparison of calculation and experimental
sulfur potentials of the liquid alloy phase
For the liquid phase with metal-rich compositions, four
studies on experimental data [5 – 8] are available in the lit-
erature to be compared with calculations based on the
Gibbs energy taken from [4]. The publications by Ban-ya
and Chipman [7] and Dondelinger et al. [8] allow demon-
strating all their data on sulfur potentials of liquid Cr–Fe al-
loys in one single plot because composition data of the var-
ious samples can be classified in 6 groups with respect to a
certain temperature and partial pressure of sulfur. Figure 1
shows the sample’s equilibrium weight percent of sulfur
(wt.% S) of each group denoted with A to F as a function
of a second composition variable expressed as the ratio
wCr/(wCr + wFe) where wCr and wFe are equilibrium mass
fractions of chromium and iron, respectively. In order to
simulate the experimental conditions during equilibration
of an alloy exposed to an H2S containing gas phase, the cor-
responding temperature and partial pressure of sulfur were
353
 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis
taken as input for the thermodynamic calculations repre-
sented as 6 lines and also denoted with A to F. It can be seen
that the agreement between experimental data and the cal-
culations is satisfactory and very good for the data of Don-
delinger et al. [8] at 1 755 8C (group E).
The data of [5, 6] had to be reproduced by single-point
calculations since experimental conditions do not allow
summarizing classifications to be given in a graphical de-
monstration. Satisfactory correspondence between experi-
ment and prediction can also be reported here.
4.2. Comparison of calculation and experimental
sulfur potentials of solid alloy phases
In this study the experimental data on sulfur activities in
solid alloy phases are expressed as sulfur partial pressures
of S2 gas. Figure 2 shows the data of Fujisawa et al. [12]
versus mole fraction sulfur which refer to constant mole
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.
354
fractions of chromium at 1 300 8C starting from the binary
Fe–S up to ternary alloys with almost 0.5 mole fraction
chromium. In addition the experimental data of [19] for bin-
ary Fe–S alloys only are also shown for comparison. The
reader is referred to the study of [2] were a larger body of
various publications for binary Fe–S data has been repro-
duced using the Gibbs energies for the Fe–S bcc and fcc al-
loy phases. As can be seen from Fig. 2, the calculation
shows good agreement with the majority of the experimen-
tal data of [12] using the modeled Gibbs energy for ternary
bcc and fcc alloy phases according to Eq. (1).
In contrast to [12] (constant mole fractions of chromium)
Grolière and Barbouth [10] and Estager and Barbouth [11]
performed their experiments at constant ratios of the form
wCr/(wCr + wFe) at three distinct temperatures. The study of
Grolière and Barbouth [10] covers the range of the ratio
wCr/(wCr + wFe) from 0.05 up to 0.30 whereas Estager and
Barbouth [11] continued at 0.40 up to 0.70. Figure 3a–f
Fig. 1. Calculated composition of liquid al-
loys equilibrated with gas phases at various
temperatures and sulfur potentials expressed
as partial pressure of S2 gas together with ex-
perimental data (see text for details of the no-
tation A to F). Horizontal lines correspond to
adjacent two-phase equilibria, where a second
liquid phase occurs.
Fig. 2. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-
pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of solid
alloy phases at various chromium contents
(0.0, 0.0354 and 0.0599 are related to the fcc
alloy phase, the remaining ones to the bcc al-
loy phase) together with experimental data.
Horizontal lines correspond to adjacent two-
phase equilibria where pyrrhotite occurs.
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4
 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis

Fig. 3a. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-

pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of
the fcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Grolière and
Barbouth [10]. Horizontal lines correspond to
adjacent two-phase equilibria where pyrrho-
tite occurs.
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.

Fig. 3b. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-

pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of the
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.

fcc and bcc alloy phases at constant ratio

wCr/(wCr + wFe) and three distinct tempera-
tures (1 185 8C refers to equilibrium fcc + bcc
phase assemblage, 1 095 8C and 985 8C to fcc
single phase) together with experimental data
by Grolière and Barbouth [10]. The dashed
line represents the calculation of a metastable
state where only the fcc alloy phase is stable
(see text for discussion). Horizontal lines cor-
respond to adjacent two-phase equilibria
where pyrrhotite occurs.

Fig. 3c. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-

pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of the
fcc and bcc alloy phases at constant ratio
wCr/(wCr + wFe) and three distinct tempera-
tures (1 185 8C and 1 095 8C refer to the bcc
alloy phase, 985 8C to the bcc + bcc phase as-
semblage) together with experimental data
by Grolière and Barbouth [10]. Horizontal
lines correspond to adjacent two- and three-
phase equilibria where pyrrhotite occurs.

Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4 355

 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis

Fig. 3d. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-

pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of the
bcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Grolière and
Barbouth [10]. The horizontal line corre-
sponds to adjacent two-phase equilibria
where pyrrhotite occurs.
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.

Fig. 3e. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-

pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of
the bcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Grolière and
Barbouth [10]. The horizontal line corre-
sponds to adjacent two-phase equilibria
where pyrrhotite occurs.

Fig. 3f. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-

pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of
the bcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Grolière and
Barbouth [10]. The horizontal line corre-
sponds to adjacent two-phase equilibria
where pyrrhotite occurs.

356 Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4

 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis
shows that the calculation (solid lines at three distinct tem-
peratures) reproduces the experimental data for the ratios
wCr/(wCr + wFe) = 0.05, 0.13 and only partly for 0.18, 0.23
and 0.30 satisfactorily. The ratio wCr/(wCr + wFe) is also
given as a function of the corresponding mole fractions,
that is xCr/(xCr + xFe). In addition to equilibrium calcula-
tions for 1 185 8C (bcc + fcc alloy phases are both stable)
Fig. 3b (ratio wCr/(wCr + wFe) = 0.10) shows also a calcula-
tion (dashed line) according to a metastable state where
the bcc alloy phase was suppressed (e. g. simulating a bar-
rier for the crystallization of the bcc phase) and conse-
quently only the fcc alloy phase was allowed to become
stable. It can be seen that this simulation at 1 185 8C results
in a much better agreement between model prediction and
experimental data. However, no explanation was found
for the deviations between calculation and experiment
shown in Fig. 3d–f mostly for elevated temperatures, espe-
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4
cially in view of the good correspondence with the data by
Estager and Barbouth [11] for the subsequent ratios wCr/
(wCr + wFe) = 0.40, 0.50, 0.60 and 0.70 as demonstrated in
Fig. 4a–d. It should be mentioned that Figs. 3d–f and 4a–
d are all related to the same alloy phase with bcc structure.
It is difficult to understand why the sulfur potential of the
bcc alloys should show such a strong change between the
ratios wCr/(wCr + wFe) = 0.30 [10] and 0.40 [11] at similar
elevated temperatures as the corresponding deviation and
correspondence with the calculation using the same Gibbs
energy model for the bcc alloy phase reveals. It should be
noted that the occurrence of kinks in the computed lines
in Figs. 2 and 4 can be identified with the maximum solu-
bility of the corresponding alloy phases since the subse-
quent horizontal lines represent a phase field where high-
temperature chromium–iron pyrrhotite (Cr,Fe)1xS is addi-
tionally stable. The Gibbs energy of the involved adjacent
Fig. 4a. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-
pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of the
bcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Estager and
Barbouth [11]. The horizontal line corre-
sponds to adjacent two-phase equilibria
where pyrrhotite occurs.
Fig. 4b. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-
pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of the
bcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Estager and
Barbouth [11]. The horizontal line corre-
sponds to adjacent two-phase equilibria
where pyrrhotite occurs.
357
 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis
phase, that is high-temperature chromium–iron pyrrhotite
(Cr,Fe)1xS, is taken from [4].
Grolière and Barbouth [10] also reported on data for the
ratio wCr/(wCr + wFe) = 1 which corresponds to the binary
system Cr–S. As already reported recently in [3] agreement
between computation and experimental data is satisfactory.
4.3. Prediction of phase equilibria
The modeled Gibbs energy functions for the bcc and fcc al-
loys were taken to predict an isotherm at 1 300 8C for which
experimental data independent of [5 – 11] are available in
the literature and which contains all phase equilibria where
both alloy phases are stable. Figure 5a shows a partial iso-
therm at 1 300 8C revealing the ternary homogeneity range
of the bcc and fcc alloy phases being in equilibrium with
each other and with high-temperature chromium–iron pyr-
rhotite (Cr, Fe)1xS over the whole composition range along
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.
358
the metallic Fe–Cr subsystem. The dashed lines are calcu-
lated tie-lines. Fair to satisfactory agreement between pre-
dicted phase boundaries (solid lines) and experimental data
from [12] can be concluded from Fig. 5a together with the
magnification of the partial isotherm section given in
Fig. 5b. Data points by [20] for 1 316 8C close to 1 300 8C
and by [19] are related to the Fe–S subsystem where the
predicted phase boundary between the mono-phase field
fcc and the two phase fields fcc + liq as well as fcc + Pyrr
emanates. In order to compare the status according to [4]
and the present study phase boundaries computed without
consideration of ternary interaction parameters in the Gibbs
energy models (Eqs. (1) and (2)) for the bcc and fcc alloy
phases are inserted as dotted lines. It can be seen that the
correspondence between experiments and prediction is im-
proved by the results of this work.
It should be mentioned that all sulfur activity data which
were the basis to compute the ternary interaction parame-
Fig. 4c. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-
pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of
the bcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Estager and
Barbouth [11]. Horizontal lines correspond
to adjacent two-phase equilibria where pyr-
rhotite occurs.
Fig. 4d. Calculated sulfur potentials (ex-
pressed as partial pressure of S2 gas) of
the bcc alloy phase at constant ratio wCr/
(wCr + wFe) and three distinct temperatures to-
gether with experimental data by Estager and
Barbouth [11]. Horizontal lines correspond
to adjacent two-phase equilibria where pyr-
rhotite occurs.
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4
 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.
ters according to Eq. (2) cover only a solubility range up to
around 100 ppm as shown in the Figs. 2 to 4. Nevertheless,
the prediction of phase boundaries locating the maximum
sulfur solubility of both fcc and bcc alloy phases up to
800 ppm for iron-rich alloys down to around 40 ppm for
pure chromium are satisfactorily in line with experiments.
The model reproduces also the solubility of 13 ppm sulfur
in an Fe-10Cr (wt.%) alloy at 1 000 8C reported by Josey
and Floridis [9].
5. Conclusions
Gibbs energy modeling of sulfur solving Fe–Cr liquid and
solid alloy phases has been carried out consistently with a
recent thermodynamic description of the Cr–Fe–S system
including all sulfides. A large body of experimental data
on sulfur partial pressure close to the metallic binary sub-
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4
Fig. 5a. Solid and dashed lines computed
with ternary parameters: Partial isothermal
section and tie-lines of the Cr–Fe–S phase
diagram at 1 300 8C together with experimen-
tal data; dotted lines refer to calculations
without usage of ternary parameters; Abbre-
viations: bcc stands for the body-centered cu-
bic Cr–Fe–S alloy phase, fcc for the face-cen-
tered cubic Cr–Fe–S alloy phase and Pyrr for
Cr–Fe-pyrrhotite.
Fig. 5b. Solid and dashed lines computed
with ternary parameters: Partial isothermal
section and tie-lines of the Cr–Fe–S phase
diagram at 1 300 8C together with experimen-
tal data; dotted lines refer to calculations
without usage of ternary parameters; Abbre-
viations: bcc stands for the body-centered cu-
bic Cr–Fe–S alloy phase, fcc for the face-cen-
tered cubic Cr–Fe–S alloy phase and Pyrr for
Cr–Fe-pyrrhotite.
system Cr–Fe can be reproduced. Discrepancies between
experimental data from different publications are con-
firmed by the modeling calculations. On the basis of the
presented Gibbs energy models, an isothermal section at
1 300 8C is computed showing all phase relations where
the ternary alloy solid solutions are involved. The predicted
phase boundaries describing the sulfur solubility are sa-
tisfactorily in line with experimental data. The present
assessment is suitable for implementation in thermo-
dynamic databases for multicomponent metal–sulfur sys-
tems.
References
[1] K. Oikawa, H. Mitsu, H. Ohtani, K. Ishida: ISIJ Int. 40 (2000)
182. DOI:10.2355/isijinternational.40.182
[2] P. Waldner, A.D. Pelton: J. Phase Equil. Diff. 26 (2005) 23.
DOI:10.1007/s11669-005-0055-y
359
 P. Waldner: Sulfur solubility of liquid and solid Fe–Cr alloys: A thermodynamic analysis

[3] P. Waldner, W. Sitte: Int. J. Mater. Res. 102 (2011) 1216. Correspondence address
DOI:10.3139/146.110587
[4] P. Waldner: Metall. Mater. Trans. A 45 (2014) 798. Assistant-Prof. Dr. Peter Waldner
DOI:10.1007/s11661-013-1999-x Department of General, Analytical and Physical Chemistry
[5] N.R. Griffing, G.W. Healy: Trans. AIME 218 (1960) 849. University of Leoben
[6] A. Adachi, Z. Morita: Technol. Rept. Osaka Univ. 13 (1963) 537. Franz-Josef-Straße 18
[7] S. Ban-ya, J. Chipman: Trans. AIME 245 (1969) 133. A-8700 Leoben
[8] J.G. Dondelinger, D.A.R. Kay, A. McLean: Metall. Trans. 2 Austria
(1971) 3203. DOI:10.1007/BF02814973 Tel.: +43 3842 402 4810
[9] G.A. Josey Jr., T.P. Floridis: Trans. AIME 242 (1968) 161. Fax: +43 3842 402 4802
[10] R. Grolière, N. Barbouth: Mem. Sci. Rev. Metall. 13 (1976) 71. E-mail: peter.waldner@unileoben.ac.at
[11] M.-C. Estager, N. Barbouth: Mem. Sci. Rev. Metall. 15 (1978) 57.
[12] T. Fujisawa, M. Asano, T. Suzuki, Ch. Yamauchi, H. Sakao:
Tetsu to Hagane 74 (1988) 1013.
[13] N. Saunders, P. Miodownik: CALPHAD, Pergamon Materials
Series (1998).
[14] C.W. Bale, P. Chartrand, S.A. Degterov, G. Eriksson, K. Hack,
R.B. Mahfoud, J. Melançon, A.D. Pelton, S. Petersen: CALPHAD
26 (2002) 189. DOI:10.1016/S0364-5916(02)00035-4
[15] J.O. Andersson, B. Sundman: CALPHAD 11 (1987) 83.
DOI:10.1016/0364-5916(87)90021-6
[16] Y.-M. Muggianu, M. Gambino, J.-P. Bros: J. Chem. Phys. 72
(1975) 83.
[17] M. Hillert: CALPHAD 4 (1980) 1.
DOI:10.1016/0364-5916(80)90016-4
[18] B.J. Lee: Metall. Mater. Trans. A 24 (1993) 1919.
DOI:10.1007/BF02646517
[19] M. Fischer, K. Schwerdtfeger: Metall. Trans. B 9 (1978) 631. Bibliography
DOI 10.3139/146.111185
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 25, 2015. For personal use only.

DOI:10.1007/BF03257211
[20] A.M. Barloga, K.R. Bock, N. Parlee: Trans. AIME 221 (1961) Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.)
173. 106 (2015) 4; page 352 – 360
# Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG
(Received October 1, 2014; accepted November 21, 2014; ISSN 1862-5282
online since January 27, 2015)
IJMR 2015.106:352-360.

360 Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 106 (2015) 4