2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.molliq.2014.11.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The transport and conductivity properties of the ionic liquid EMIMTCM

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
16
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
16
2
Order By: Relevance
“…14 Ganbold et al 126 As already observed for the viscosities reported by the two groups the data significantly deviate from the measured values reported in the present work. The conductivities deviate by 27% 76 and between 55 and 72% 126 and are therefore not included here for a comparison study. The ionic conductivity can be estimated assuming an uncorrelated contribution of the individual species to the total ionic conductivity using the Nernst-Einstein (NE) equation:…”
contrasting
confidence: 54%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…14 Ganbold et al 126 As already observed for the viscosities reported by the two groups the data significantly deviate from the measured values reported in the present work. The conductivities deviate by 27% 76 and between 55 and 72% 126 and are therefore not included here for a comparison study. The ionic conductivity can be estimated assuming an uncorrelated contribution of the individual species to the total ionic conductivity using the Nernst-Einstein (NE) equation:…”
contrasting
confidence: 54%
“…The temperature dependence of [C n mim][TCM] electrical conductivity is illustrated in Fig. 14 Ganbold et al 126 As already observed for the viscosities reported by the two groups the data significantly deviate from the measured values reported in the present work. The conductivities deviate by 27% 76 and between 55 and 72% 126 and are therefore not included here for a comparison study.…”
supporting
confidence: 44%
“…As seen, our density measurements agree closely with those of Fröba et al [17] and Królikowski et al [1], but also the agreement with other literature data is within the expanded (k = 2) combined uncertainties of the measurements. The viscosity determinations show generally much greater disparities; here our measurements agree best with those of Domań ska et al [19], while the most recent data of Ganbold et al [18], which can be unfortunately considered less reliable because of unknown water content in their sample, deviate the most. The value of refractive index at T = 298.15 K measured by us for pure [EMIM][TCM] (n D ¼ 1:51227) agrees within experimental uncertainty with those determined by Fröba et al [17] (n D ¼ 1:51217, linearly interpolated between T = (293.15 and 303.15) K) and Neves et al [16] (n D ¼ 1:51236), but the value (n D ¼ 1:5116) interpolated from measurements of Koller et al [14] deviates significantly.…”
Section: Results Of Measurements and Data Correlationsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Reference [18] Reference [15] Reference [16] Reference [19] 288. 15 a At ambient pressure p = 100kPa; u(p) = 5kPa.…”
Section: Results Of Measurements and Data Correlationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More exotic substances like ionic liquids can be extensively studied by NMR. In order to more completely understand the dynamics of the medium, a complex approach to the study of dynamics can be attempted . This can include spectroscopy, relaxometry and dNMR as well as non‐NMR measurements such as conductivity and viscosity measurements.…”
Section: Diffusographymentioning
confidence: 99%