2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2020.115564
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effects of cell density and intrinsic porosity on structural properties and adsorption kinetics in 3D-printed zeolite monoliths

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
75
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(79 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
2
75
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The surface topographies were rough and contained macropores of ≈5–10 µm in diameter, which were likely formed during methylcellulose removal (Figure S3b,c, Supporting Information). [ 30 ] It is also worth noting here that an even dispersion of crystalline phases was observed across the monolith surface. After imaging this phase at high magnification (Figure S3d, Supporting Information), the phase was found to be ≈5 um in diameter.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…The surface topographies were rough and contained macropores of ≈5–10 µm in diameter, which were likely formed during methylcellulose removal (Figure S3b,c, Supporting Information). [ 30 ] It is also worth noting here that an even dispersion of crystalline phases was observed across the monolith surface. After imaging this phase at high magnification (Figure S3d, Supporting Information), the phase was found to be ≈5 um in diameter.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…As such, when applying this approach to other zeolites, a good starting point for paste optimization would be to begin using only pectin, followed by incremental gelatin addition to minimize ink spreading. It is also worth noting here that, in our earlier techniques [1,[11][12][13][14][15][16], the paste formulation and densification processes took place over the course of 1-3 days, whereas this new technique yielded a printable paste in less than 5 min, meaning that this new method allows for much faster rheological optimization. Therefore, utilizing sacrificial biopolymers for zeolite gelation and 3D printing can be considered a superior technique from a rapid manufacturing perspective, as it dramatically reduced binding time from traditional paste formulation.…”
Section: Monolith Formulationmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…After producing the zeolite/biopolymer inks, the monoliths were 3Dprinted using our established setup [1,[11][12][13][14][15][16]. The zeolite 13X and 5A monoliths were printed using 0.84 mm (Nordson) tips, however, the ZSM-5 and South African monoliths were printed using 1.36 mm tips because those inks displayed denser rheologies and could not be extruded through the smaller bores.…”
Section: Monolith Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations