Correction

This article refers to:

A theoretical interpretation of self-similar right-skewed particle size distributions in Ostwald ripening of cementite in ferrite

A discrete model of Ostwald ripening based on multiple pairwise interactions

Article title: A theoretical interpretation of self-similar right-skewed particle size distributions in Ostwald ripening of cementite in ferrite

Authors: Di Nunzio, P. E.

Journal: Philosophical Magazine

Citation details: Volume 98, Number 05, pages 388 - 407

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14786435.2017.1407880

Article title: A discrete model of Ostwald ripening based on multiple pairwise interactions

Authors: Di Nunzio, P. E.

Journal: Philosophical Magazine

Citation details: Volume 98, Number 18, pages 1674 - 1695

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14786435.2018.1455994

The present note amends a mistake found in two papers published in Philosophical Magazine in 2018 entitled “A theoretical interpretation of self-similar right-skewed particle size distributions in Ostwald ripening of cementite in ferrite” [1] and “A discrete model of Ostwald ripening based on multiple pairwise interactions” [2].

In the development of the theory, the geometrical parameter α expressing the extent of the diffusion horizon is calculated by imposing a coherency condition on the average interparticle distance with respect to an independent geometrical estimate. However, the lower limit of the integrals in the averaging operations carried out in [1] and [2] was erroneously set to R_i instead of 0.

In the correct formulation, equations (18) in [1] and (13) in [2] should be replaced by:(1) ${\mathrm{\Lambda }}_i=\frac{{\int }_0^{\alpha R_i}4\pi z^2\cdot z\mathrm{d}z}{{\int }_0^{\alpha R_i}4\pi z^2\mathrm{d}z}=\frac{3}{4}\alpha R_i.$(1)

Consequently, equations (19) in [1] and (14) in [2] should be replaced by(2) $⟨\mathrm{\Lambda }⟩=\sum _i{\varphi }_i{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_i=\frac{3}{4}\alpha ⟨r⟩f_V^{-1/3}$(2) and then equations (20) in [1] and (15) in [2] become(3) $2⟨r⟩f_V^{-1/3}=\frac{3}{4}\alpha ⟨r⟩f_V^{-1/3}$(3) whose (unique) solution is α = 8/3 = 2.667.

This is, by chance, very close to the incorrect value of 2.568 originally calculated.

Fortunately, the changes implied by this rectification do not alter at all either the theoretical framework proposed or the results of the computer simulations.