Effects of Variance of Pore Size Distribution on Mercury Entrapment

Nuradeen Tanko

Abstract


In literature, corrugated pore structure model (CPSM) simulation and random pore bond network in various research has established a significant finding in the transport relationship of porous media. These findings have shown a direct correlation that shows an increase in mercury entrapment as the variance of the pore size distribution gets wider. However, there is no experimental work on porous materials to support these significant findings. In this regard, this work attempted to verify the effect of Pore-size distributions on entrapment by an experimental approach. The materials studied are chemically pure mesoporous silica and alumina catalyst support pellets with simplified pore sizes, pore size distribution, and surface chemistry. The pore size distribution of the samples was obtained from the physical adsorption of the nitrogen Barrett-Joyner-Halenda algorithm. The entrapment of the samples was obtained from the retraction curves of mercury porosimetry. Therefore, a statistically significant correlation exists, and thus verifies the CPSM that mercury entrapment increases with an increase in the variance of the pore size distribution of the materials studied.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Abell, A. B., Willis, K. L., & Lange, D. A. (1999). Mercury intrusion porosimetry and image analysis of cement-based materials. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 211(1), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.1998.5986

Allen, T. (1999). Particle size measurement. Dordretch, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic publishers.

Androutsopoulost, G. P., & Mann, R. (1978). Evaluation Using of Mercury a Network Pore Structure Experiments. Chemical Engineering Science, 34, 1203–1212.

Bafarawa, B., Nepryahin, A., Ji, L., Holt, E. M., Wang, J., & Rigby, S. P. (2014). Combining mercury thermoporometry with integrated gas sorption and mercury porosimetry to improve the accuracy of pore-size distributions for disordered solids. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 426, 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2014.03.053

Barrett, E. P., Joyner, L. G., & Halenda, P. P. (1951). The Determination of Pore Volume and Area Distributions in Porous Substances. I. Computations from Nitrogen Isotherms. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 73(1), 373–380. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja01145a126

Brunauer, S., Emmett, P. H., & Teller, E. (1938). Adsorption of Gases in Multimolecular Layers. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 60(2), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja01269a023

Chatfield, C. (1983)Statistics for technology: A course in applied statistics. Chapman & Hall/CRC.

Conner, W. C., Lane, A. M., & Hoffman, A. J. (1984). Measurement of the morphology of high surface area solids: hysteresis in mercury porosimetry. Journal of Colloid And Interface Science, 100(1), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(84)90424-7

Diamond, S. (2000). Mercury porosimetry. An inappropriate method for the measurement of pore size distributions in cement-based materials. Cement and Concrete Research, 30(10), 1517–1525. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(00)00370-7

Drewry, H. P. G., & Seaton, N. A. (1995). Continuum random walk simulations of diffusion and reaction in catalyst particles. AIChE Journal, 41(4), 880–893. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690410415

Ghaly, G., Beurroies, I., & Ragai, J. (2009). Mesoporous titania gels prepared from titanous chloride and ammonia: SEM, nitrogen adsorption, thermoporometry and mercury porosimetry studies. Adsorption Science and Technology, 27(10), 937–945. https://doi.org/10.1260/0263-6174.27.10.937

Giesche, H. (2006). Mercury porosimetry: A general (practical) overview. Particle and Particle Systems Characterization, 23(1), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppsc.200601009

Hitchcock, I., Malik, S., Holt, E. M., Fletcher, R. S., & Rigby, S. P. (2014). Impact of chemical heterogeneity on the accuracy of pore size distributions in disordered solids. Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 118(35), 20627–20638. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp505482p

Horvath, G. and Kawazoe, K. (1983). Method for calculation effective pore size distribution in molecular sieve carbon. J. Chem. Eng. Japan, 16(12), 470–475.

Ioannidis, M. A., & Chatzis, I. (1993). Network Modelling of Fore Structure and. Engineering, 48(5), 951–972.

Lapidus, G. R., Lane, A. M., Ng, K. M., & Conner, W. C. (1985). Interpretation of Mercury Porosimetry Data Using a Pore-Throat Network Model. Chemical Engineering Communications, 38(1–2), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986448508911294

Lastoskie, C., Gubbins, K. E., & Quirke, N. (1993). Pore size distribution analysis of microporous carbons: A density functional theory approach. Journal of Physical Chemistry, 97(18), 4786–4796. https://doi.org/10.1021/j100120a035

Liu, H., & Seaton, N. A. (1994). Determination of the connectivity of porous solids from nitrogen sorption measurements-III. Solids containing large mesopores. Chemical Engineering Science, 49(11), 1869–1878. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(94)80071-5

Lowell, S., & Shields, J. E. (1981). Hysteresis, entrapment, and wetting angle in mercury porosimetry. Journal of Colloid And Interface Science, 83(1), 273–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(81)90032-1

Ma, H. (2014). Mercury intrusion porosimetry in concrete technology: Tips in measurement, pore structure parameter acquisition and application. Journal of Porous Materials, 21(2), 207–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10934-013-9765-4

Meyer, H. I. (1953). Pore distribution in porous media. Journal of Applied Physics, 24(5), 510–512. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1721319

Moro, F., & Böhni, H. (2002). Ink-bottle effect in mercury intrusion porosimetry of cement-based materials. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 246(1), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.2001.7962

Nguyen, P. T. M., Do, D. D., & Nicholson, D. (2011). On the hysteresis loop of argon adsorption in cylindrical pores. Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 115(11), 4706–4720. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp111254j

Orr, C. (1969). Application of mercury penetration to materials analysis. Powder Technology, 3(1), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-5910(69)80064-1

Pirard R., Heinrichs B., Pirard J.P. in: McEnaney B., Mays T.J., Rouquerol J., Reinoso R.F., Sing

K.S.W., Unger (Eds.) K.K. (1997). Characterisation of Porous Solids IV, Royal Society of Chemistry. Cambridge.

Portsmouth, R.L., and Gladden, L.F. (1991). Mercury porosimetry as a probe of pore connectivity. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 70 (1), 63-70

Portsmouth, R.L., and Gladden, L.F. (1992). Mercury porosimetry as a probe of pore connectivity.

Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 1992, 70 (1), 63-70.

Rasmussen, C. J., Gor, G. Y., & Neimark, A. V. (2012). Monte Carlo simulation of cavitation in pores with nonwetting defects. Langmuir, 28(10), 4702–4711. https://doi.org/10.1021/la300078k

Rigby, S. P. (2000). A hierarchical structural model for the interpretation of mercury porosimetry and nitrogen sorption. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 224(2), 382–396. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.1999.6707

Rigby, S. P., & Chigada, P. I. (2009). Interpretation of integrated gas sorption and mercury porosimetry studies of adsorption in disordered networks using mean-field DFT. Adsorption, 15(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10450-008-9147-4

Rigby, S. P., Chigada, P. I., Evbuomvan, I. O., Chudek, J. A., Miri, T., Wood, J., & Bakalis, S. (2008). Experimental and modelling studies of the kinetics of mercury retraction from highly confined geometries during porosimetry in the transport and the quasi-equilibrium regimes. Chemical Engineering Science, 63(24), 5771–5788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2008.08.027

Rigby, S. P., Chigada, P. I., Wang, J., Wilkinson, S. K., Bateman, H., Al-Duri, B., … Miri, T. (2011). Improving the interpretation of mercury porosimetry data using computerised X-ray tomography and mean-field DFT. Chemical Engineering Science, 66(11), 2328–2339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2011.02.031

Rigby, S. P., Fletcher, R. S., & Riley, S. N. (2003). Determination of the cause of mercury entrapment during porosimetry experiments on sol-gel silica catalyst supports. Applied Catalysis A: General, 247(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-860X(03)00059-0

Rouquerol, J., Llewellyn, P., & Rouquerol, F. (2007). Is the BET equation applicable to microporous adsorbents? Studies in Surface Science and Catalysis, 160, 49–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-2991(07)80008-5

Schreiber, J., Bell, F., Grüner, F., Schramm, U., Geissler, M., Schnürer, M., … Habs, D. (2006). Analytical model for ion acceleration by high-intensity laser pulses. Physical Review Letters, 97(4), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.045005

Seaton, N. A., Walton, J. P. R. B., & quirke, N. (1989). A new analysis method for the determination of the pore size distribution of porous carbons from nitrogen adsorption measurements. Carbon, 27(6), 853–861. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(89)90035-3

Stefan, D., Harald, B., Anna, S., Günter, K., Thomas, R. (2006). Determination of Porosity and Pore. Connectivity in Fieldspares from Soils of Granite and Saprolite. Soil Science: 171(9), 675-694

Tsakiroglou, C.D., and Payatakes, A.C. (1990). A new simulator of mercury porosimetry for the characterization of porous materials. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 137, 315-339

Wardlaw, N. C., & McKellar, M. (1981). Mercury porosimetry and the interpretation of pore geometry in sedimentary rocks and artificial models. Powder Technology, 29(1), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-5910(81)85011-5

Washburn, E. W. (1921). The dynamics of capillary flow. Phys. Rev., 1921, 17, 273-283


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.