2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2010.01.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A study of the pore size distribution for activated carbon monoliths and their relationship with the storage of methane and hydrogen

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
1
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In general, these approximations are improvements regarding the simulated isotherm fitting and constitute an example of the vast number of factors that have to be considered when simulating the adsorption of this kind of materials. Another study field is the PSD calculation from the adsorption isotherms obtained for diverse gases, having different sizes and thermodynamic conditions (below or above the Tc) (Quirke & Tennison, 1996;Samios et al, 1997;Ravikovitch et al, 2000;Sweatman & Quike, 2001a;Sweatman & Quike, 2001b;Jagiello & Thommes, 2004;Jagiello et al, 2007;Konstantakou et al, 2007;García Blanco et al, 2010). Results have shown discrepancies among the obtained PSDs and have evidenced the convenience of using gases as CO 2 and H 2 for the characterization of materials exhibiting ultramicropores (smaller than 0.7 nm).…”
Section: Characterization -Determination Of the Pore Size Distributionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In general, these approximations are improvements regarding the simulated isotherm fitting and constitute an example of the vast number of factors that have to be considered when simulating the adsorption of this kind of materials. Another study field is the PSD calculation from the adsorption isotherms obtained for diverse gases, having different sizes and thermodynamic conditions (below or above the Tc) (Quirke & Tennison, 1996;Samios et al, 1997;Ravikovitch et al, 2000;Sweatman & Quike, 2001a;Sweatman & Quike, 2001b;Jagiello & Thommes, 2004;Jagiello et al, 2007;Konstantakou et al, 2007;García Blanco et al, 2010). Results have shown discrepancies among the obtained PSDs and have evidenced the convenience of using gases as CO 2 and H 2 for the characterization of materials exhibiting ultramicropores (smaller than 0.7 nm).…”
Section: Characterization -Determination Of the Pore Size Distributionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The PSDs calculated from the isotherms of CO 2 , H 2 and CH 4 can detect narrow porosity that N 2 cannot because, as discussed before, it seems to have diffusion problems. The similitude between the PSDs obtained from CO 2 , H 2 and CH 4 at subatmosferic pressures, should be noted (García Blanco et al, 2010). www.intechopen.com…”
Section: Monolithic Activated Carbonsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As we already mentioned, the question of whether the PSDs obtained through different adsorbates should be the same for a given sample is still controversial. Ravikovitch et al (2000) and Jagiello and Thommes (2004) find similar PSDs for different gases for a kind of carbon fibers, while Blanco et al (2010) find different PSDs for different gases adsorbed in AC monoliths. The present study seems to reinforce the idea that different adsorbates should generally provide different PSDs for the same sample.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…The proper selection of the conditions for the process of producing microporous carbonaceous adsorbents and optimizing their structure to the specific application conditions such as natural gas storage requires precise description of the microporous structure [6,[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%