重塑材料四面体,Journal of Chemical Education

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › J. Chem. Educ. › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

重塑材料四面体
Journal of Chemical Education ( IF 2.5 ) Pub Date : 2019-07-08 , DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00016
Craig J. Donahue ₁

Affiliation

在此评论中，对材料四面体进行了评论，并提出了另一种格式：材料四角锥。通过在人类圈内金属生命周期的背景下检查材料四面体，可以发现材料四面体仅涉及生命周期的中间部分，即生命周期的制造和制造以及使用组件。四面体材料省略了生命周期的开始和结束，即，金属的生产以及寿命终止时金属的处置或回收。方形棱锥材料保留了四面体材料中的加工，结构，性能和性能的概念，但增加了构成方形棱锥基础的可持续性/关键性要素。从工业生态学的角度，简要描述了金属使用的趋势以及原材料供应短缺和价格波动的潜在原因。定义了关键程度，并在此讨论的上下文中说明了其有用性。使用以下三个示例比较了四面体材料与方形金字塔材料的效用：铅焊料，锂离子电池中的钴和永磁体中的稀土元素。使用方形棱锥材料来批判这些应用程序可能会在环境影响领域或供应风险方面引发危险信号，因为四面体材料会忽略或忽略供应风险的供应风险。定义了关键程度，并在此讨论的上下文中说明了其有用性。使用以下三个示例比较了四面体材料与方形金字塔材料的效用：铅焊料，锂离子电池中的钴和永磁体中的稀土元素。使用方形棱锥材料来批判这些应用程序可能会在环境影响领域或供应风险方面引发危险信号，因为四面体材料会忽略或忽略供应风险的供应风险。定义了关键程度，并在此讨论的上下文中说明了其有用性。使用以下三个示例比较了四面体材料和方棱锥材料的效用：铅焊料，锂离子电池中的钴和永磁体中的稀土元素。使用方形棱锥材料来批判这些应用程序可能会在环境影响领域或供应风险方面引发危险信号，因为四面体材料会忽略或忽略供应风险的供应风险。

"点击查看英文标题和摘要"

Reimagining the Materials Tetrahedron

In this commentary, the materials tetrahedron is critiqued, and an alternative format is proposed: a materials square pyramid. By examining the materials tetrahedron in the context of the life cycle of a metal in the anthroposphere, it is observed that the materials tetrahedron addresses only the middle portion of the life cycle, namely, the fabrication and manufacturing and the use component of the life cycle. The materials tetrahedron omits the beginning and end of the life cycle, namely, production of the metal and the disposal or recycling of the metal at end-of-life. The materials square pyramid retains the concepts of processing, structure, properties, and performance found in the materials tetrahedron, but adds a sustainability/criticality component, which constitutes the base of the square pyramid. Drawing from the field of industrial ecology, trends in metals usage are briefly delineated along with potential reasons for raw material supply shortages and price volatility. Criticality is defined, and its usefulness is illustrated in the context of this discussion. The utility of the materials tetrahedron versus that of the materials square pyramid is compared using three examples: lead solder, cobalt in lithium ion batteries, and rare earth elements in permanent magnets. The use of the materials square pyramid to critique these applications potentially raises red flags, either in the area of environmental impact or in supply risk–vulnerability to supply risk, which the materials tetrahedron misses or ignores.

更新日期：2019-11-18

点击分享查看原文

点击收藏

公开下载

阅读更多本刊新发论文本刊介绍/投稿指南