1977
DOI: 10.1021/j100538a006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Physical adsorption on patchwise heterogeneous surfaces. 2. Virial coefficient theory analysis of krypton adsorption on graphitized carbon black

Abstract: Physical adsorption data for krypton adsorbed on graphitized carbon black (gcb) is analyzed by the virial coefficient (VC) theory of adsorption. Both high and low temperature adsorption data are included, and heterogeneity is determined. Strong site heterogeneity of Sterling FT gcb is found to be 0.5 ± 0.1% of the surface, a considerably higher value than previous estimates. Adsorption data taken over a wide temperature range is found to be capable of determining three attributes of the gas-solid potential ene… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

1978
1978
1985
1985

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, Putnam and a somewhat better fit to the data than the (4-10), and that variations in m from 9 to 16 with = 3 give a marginally best fit at me* 12. The preference for a (3-m) potential is surprising at first because the theoretical justification for this model is weak; however, one of the most interesting features of Figure 3 is the indication that the deviations of In SAS* vs. 1/T* from linearity are nearly the same for the £(4-10) models as for the (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12) potential, at least for 1/T* > 4.5. Thus, one concludes that the £(4-10) potentials should fit the Kr-gcb data at least as well as the (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Indeed, Putnam and a somewhat better fit to the data than the (4-10), and that variations in m from 9 to 16 with = 3 give a marginally best fit at me* 12. The preference for a (3-m) potential is surprising at first because the theoretical justification for this model is weak; however, one of the most interesting features of Figure 3 is the indication that the deviations of In SAS* vs. 1/T* from linearity are nearly the same for the £(4-10) models as for the (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12) potential, at least for 1/T* > 4.5. Thus, one concludes that the £(4-10) potentials should fit the Kr-gcb data at least as well as the (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The preference for a (3-m) potential is surprising at first because the theoretical justification for this model is weak; however, one of the most interesting features of Figure 3 is the indication that the deviations of In SAS* vs. 1/T* from linearity are nearly the same for the £(4-10) models as for the (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12) potential, at least for 1/T* > 4.5. Thus, one concludes that the £(4-10) potentials should fit the Kr-gcb data at least as well as the (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12). It is also clear that the task of refitting the data for Ar, Kr, and Xe on gcb to the £(4-10) model will be greatly facilitated by this similarity in shape.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 3 more Smart Citations