2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.cplett.2009.09.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Freezing of water adsorbed on hydrophobic and activated soot particles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
21
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
2
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[15,52] Moreover, the adsorption energy calculated herein and on the other types of carbonaceous nanoparticles are in close agreement with the water adsorption enthalpy measured on aviation kerosene soot [53] and on various activated carbon surfaces. [54] …”
Section: Comparison With Water Adsorption On Other Types Of Carbonacesupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[15,52] Moreover, the adsorption energy calculated herein and on the other types of carbonaceous nanoparticles are in close agreement with the water adsorption enthalpy measured on aviation kerosene soot [53] and on various activated carbon surfaces. [54] …”
Section: Comparison With Water Adsorption On Other Types Of Carbonacesupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Finally, the formation of small water aggregates around the active sites present at a soot surface is in full agreement with experimental interpretations of adsorption isothermal measurements on various types of soot. [15,52] Moreover, the adsorption energy calculated herein and on the other types of carbonaceous nanoparticles are in close agreement with the water adsorption enthalpy measured on aviation kerosene soot [53] and on various activated carbon surfaces. [54]…”
Section: Comparison With Water Adsorption On Other Types Of Carbonacesupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Ice nucleation activity of various hydrophobic and hydrophilic soot particles reported by Koehler et al [2009] showed a wide range of onset conditions. It is not clear why soot particles from various sources exhibited different ice nucleation properties, but the size or radius of the curvature of soot nanostructures [Lupi et al, 2014]; the surface polarity or hydrophilic groups available on the soot surface [Popovicheva et al, 2008]; the layers of PAH compounds such as polyaromatics, alkanes, and benzene during combustion on the surface [Demirdjian et al, 2009]; and the different physico-chemical surface properties [Popovicheva et al, 2008] could have all played a role. A detailed investigation to understand the differences is beyond Geophysical Research Letters 10.1002/2016GL068707 the scope of this paper, but we emphasize the need for future laboratory studies to clarify the role of such soot surface characteristics.…”
Section: 1002/2016gl068707mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Numerous laboratory studies have investigated the ice nucleation ability of soot (e.g., Garten and Head, 1964;De-Mott, 1990;Diehl and Mitra, 1998;Gorbunov et al, 1998;DeMott et al, 1999;Gorbunov et al, 2001;Suzanne et al, 2003;Popovicheva et al, 2004;Möhler et al, 2005a, b;Dymarska et al, 2006;Kanji and Abbatt, 2006;DeMott et al, 2009;Fornea et al, 2009;Koehler et al, 2009;Kanji et al, 2011;Crawford et al, 2011;Chou et al, 2013;Brooks et al, 2014;Kulkarni et al, 2016;Schill et al, 2016;Charnawskas et al, 2017;Demirdjian et al, 2009;Kireeva et al, 2009;HĂ€usler et al, 2018) and a review was recently provided by Ullrich et al (2017). However, these studies have revealed a large variability in ice nucleation characteristics of soot particles, indicating that the ice formation ability of soot remains poorly understood.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%