Charles Darwin University

CDU eSpace
Institutional Repository

 
CDU Staff and Student only
 

Uncertainty in pore size distribution derived from adsorption isotherms: II. Adsorption integral approach

Madani, S. Hadi, Diaz, Luis H., Biggs, Mark J. and Pendleton, Phillip (2015). Uncertainty in pore size distribution derived from adsorption isotherms: II. Adsorption integral approach. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials,214(September):217-223.

Document type: Journal Article
Citation counts: Altmetric Score Altmetric Score is 1
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar

IRMA ID 75039815xPUB977
Title Uncertainty in pore size distribution derived from adsorption isotherms: II. Adsorption integral approach
Author Madani, S. Hadi
Diaz, Luis H.
Biggs, Mark J.
Pendleton, Phillip
Journal Name Microporous and Mesoporous Materials
Publication Date 2015
Volume Number 214
Issue Number September
ISSN 1387-1811   (check CDU catalogue  open catalogue search in new window)
Scopus ID 2-s2.0-84928647288
Start Page 217
End Page 223
Total Pages 7
Place of Publication Netherlands
Publisher Elsevier BV
Field of Research ENGINEERING
HERDC Category C1 - Journal Article (DIISR)
Abstract Uncertainty in the amount adsorbed in manometric adsorption isotherm measurements is well established. Here, we extend uncertainty methodologies from adsorption isotherm data uncertainty and apply them to calculate pore size distributions based on adsorption integral methods. The analyses consider as variables: uncertainty in adsorption isotherm data, regularization parameter, molecular potential model, and the number of single pore isotherms calculated with an associated quadrature interval. We demonstrate how the calculated pore size distribution is quite insensitive to the uncertainty in experimental data, but in contrast, the uncertainty in the experimental data affects the calculated value of the optimized regularization parameter which, in turn, leads to considerable variation in the calculated pore size distribution. The calculated pore size distribution is also shown to be highly dependent on the potential model selected and on the number of single pore isotherms applied to the inversion process. We conclude and suggest a quantitative comparison between calculated pore size distributions should be discouraged unless the uncertainty in the experimental data is relatively small and, default values for regularization parameters, potential models, the number of single pore isotherms and their distribution are exactly the same for each pore size distribution evaluation.
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2015.04.030   (check subscription with CDU E-Gateway service for CDU Staff and Students  check subscription with CDU E-Gateway in new window)
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Access Statistics: 4 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Tue, 26 Jul 2016, 12:37:23 CST