Comparison of pore size distribution

FIGURE 8.2 Comparison of pore size distributions for the (solid) air calcined and... 

Figure 2. Comparison of pore size distribution of MCM-41 samples by regularization with the XRD pore diameter...

Figure 3. Comparison of pore size distribution of mixture of MCM-41 materials by regularization with the XRD pore diameter, as well as pore size distribution estimated from pure components (a) C12+C18, (b) C12+C16, (c) C10+C14...

Comparison of Pore Size Distributions Determined by Mercury Injection and Gas Breakthrough Experiments... 

Figure 4.13 Comparison of pore size distribution data by pcrmporometry, thermoporomctry and mercury porosimetry [Eyraud, 1984]...

For multi-layered asymmetric or composite membranes where the pore sizes between layers are widely different, the analysis gives the pore size distribution of the densest layer (membrane) even if they may be only a small volume or weight fraction of the total membrane/support structure. Shown in Figures 4.14 (a) and (b) are the pore size distributions of two very similar multi-layered alumina membranes prepared by the sol-gel process and two distinctively different alumina membranes made by the anodic oxidation process. The comparison of pore size distributions in each case reflects the similarities and differences of the membrane samples. 

Figure 7.47. Comparison of pore size distributions obtained by using Hg porosimetry. (Taken from ref. (66))...

FIGURE 2.13. Comparison of pore size distribution for Cr203-Fe203 catalyst measured by mercury penetration and from the nitrogen desorption isotherm, (j Pore size distribution from N2 desorption isotherm. Pore size distribution from mercury penetration. (From ref. 33, reprinted with permission.)... 

Figure 3.24. Comparison of pore-size distributions based on slit shaped (A, square and rectangular ( ) model pores (Davies and Seaton, 1998).

Figure 5 Comparison of pore size distributions for wet B2 silica gel. 2500-...

Figure 5 - Comparison of pore size distribution (cumulative curves) of silica and silica-alumina hydrogels... 

Comparison of Pore Size Distribution Data of Alumina Hydrothermally Treated in Presence and Absence of Ammonia at 300°C... 

We varied the gel-forming parameters, the content of Kaolin clay, the crystal size, and the thickness-to-diameter ratio in a series of experiments. A dual structure began to appear at about 35-40% Kaolin. If the clay content was increased to too high a level, the microspheres became too weak and began to have poor attrition resistance. The cost of the various grades also affected our choice. Figure 9 shows a comparison of pore volume distribution for a typical synthetic versus a clay modified catalyst. 

COMPARISON WITH EXPERIMENTS AND CALCULATION OF PORE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS... 

J. P. Olivier, W.B. Conklin and M.V. Szombathely, Determination of pore size distribution from density functional theory a comparison of nitrogen and argon results, in J. Rouquerol, F. Rodriguez-Reinoso, K.S.W. Sing and K.K. Unger (Eds.), Characterization of Porous Solids III, Studies in Surface Science and Catalysis Vol. 87, Proc. of the lUPAC Symposium (COPS III), Marseille, France, May 1993, Elsevier Amsterdam, 1994, pp. 81-90. 

Olivier J P, Conklin W B, Vonszombathely M (1994) Determination of Pore-Size Distribution from Density-Functional Theory - a Comparison of Nitrogen and Argon Results. Characterization of Porous Solids III 87 81-89... 

Olivier, Conklin, Szombathley, Determination of Pore Size distribution from density functional theory - a comparison on Nitrogen and Argon results Studies in surface science and catalysts (Characterization of Porous Solids 3) Elsevier, Amsterdam 1994 pp. 81—87. 

Pore size distribution—comparison of results by mercury porosimetry and by adsorption of nitrogen... 

Fig. 3J1 Comparison of pore volume size distributions for Clear Creek sandstone" (courtesy Dullien.) Curve (A), from mercury porosimetry curve (B), from photomicrography (sphere model).

Fig. 3.3.3 (a) Hahn echo ]H intensity during heating cycle of cyclohexane filling the pores of catalyst pellets, (b) Pore size distribution obtained from (a) in comparison with BET measurements. 

In addition, mercury intrusion porosimetry results are shown together with the pore size distribution in Figure 3.7.3(B). The overlay of the two sets of data provides a direct comparison of the two aspects of the pore geometry that are vital to fluid flow in porous media. In short, conventional mercury porosimetry measures the distribution of pore throat sizes. On the other hand, DDIF measures both the pore body and pore throat. The overlay of the two data sets immediately identify which part of the pore space is the pore body and which is the throat, thus obtaining a model of the pore space. In the case of Berea sandstone, it is clear from Figure 3.7.3(B) that the pore space consists of a large cavity of about 85 pm and they are connected via 15-pm channels or throats. 

This abbreviated equation can be used for pore size distribution comparisons of similar samples when absolute pore size is not necessary. If, however, comparison of absolute pore sizes is required, the contact angles should be measured for all samples [42]. 

---