Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Surface binding model

At this stage it should be clear that the growth mechanism for silver nanoprism is not fully understood. However, it is also clear that growth of the nanoplates cannot be adequately explained by the surface binding model, and therefore a defect structure is a more likely model to explain the growth mechanism. In... [Pg.136]

By combining the results of the Newns-Andersons model and the considerations from the tight binding model it is now possible to explain a number of trends in surface reactivity. This has been done extensively by Norskov and coworkers and for a thorough review of this work we refer to B. Hammer and J.K. Norskov, Adv. Catal. 45 (2000) 71. We will discuss the adsorption of atoms and molecules in separate sections. [Pg.246]

Hsi C, Langmuir D (1985) Adsorphon of uranyl onto ferric oxyhydroxides applications of the surface complexation site-binding model. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 49 1931-1941 Ingri J, Widerlund A, Land M, Gustafsson O, Anderson P, Ohlander B (2000) Temporal variation in the fractionation of the rare earth elements in a boreal river the role of colloidal particles. Chem Geol 166 23-45... [Pg.571]

The basic biofilm model149,150 idealizes a biofilm as a homogeneous matrix of bacteria and the extracellular polymers that bind the bacteria together and to the surface. A Monod equation describes substrate use molecular diffusion within the biofilm is described by Fick s second law and mass transfer from the solution to the biofilm surface is modeled with a solute-diffusion layer. Six kinetic parameters (several of which can be estimated from theoretical considerations and others of which must be derived empirically) and the biofilm thickness must be known to calculate the movement of substrate into the biofilm. [Pg.833]

In REACT, we prepare the calculation by disenabling the redox couple between trivalent and pentavalent arsenic (arsenite and arsenate, respectively). As well, we disenable the couples for ferric iron and cupric copper, since we will not consider either ferrous or cupric species. We load dataset FeOH+.dat , which contains the reactions from the Dzombak and Morel (1990) surface complexation model, including those for which binding constants have only been estimated. The procedure is... [Pg.457]

It is useful to compare the capacity for each metal to be sorbed (the amount of each that could sorb if it occupied every surface site) with the metal concentrations in solution. To calculate the capacities, we take into account the amount of ferric precipitate formed in the calculation (0.89 mmol), the number of moles of strongly and weakly binding surface sites per mole of precipitate (0.005 and 0.2, respectively, according to the surface complexation model), and the site types that accept each metal [As(OH)4 and ASO4 sorb on weak sites only, whereas Pb++, Cu++, and Zn++ sorb on both strong and weak]. [Pg.459]

The above surface complexation models enable adsorption to be related to such parameters as the number of reactive sites available on the oxide surface, the intrinsic, ionization constants for each type of surface site (see Chap. 10), the capacitance and the binding constants for the adsorbed species. They, therefore, produce adsorption isotherms with a sounder physical basis than do empirical equations such as the Freundlich equation. However, owing to differences in the choice of adjustable... [Pg.257]

Felmy, A.R. Rustad, J.R. (1998) Molecular statics calculations of proton binding to goethite surfaces Thermodynamic modeling of the surface charging and protonation of goethite in aqueous solution. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 62 25—31... [Pg.578]

Hotta,Y Ozeki, S. Suzuki,T. Imal, S. Ka-neko, S. (1991) Surface characterization of titanated a-Fe203. Langmuir 7 2649—2654 Howe, A.T. Gallagher, K.J. (1975) Mossbauer studies in the colloidal system P-FeOOH — P-Fe20j Structures and dehydration mechanism. J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. I. 71 22-34 Hsi, C.D. Langmuir, D. (1985) Adsorption of uranyl onto ferric oxyhydroxides Application of the surface complexation site-binding model. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 49 1931-1941... [Pg.590]

Hsi, C.-K. D. Langmuir, D. 1985. Adsorption of uranyl onto ferric oxyhydroxides application of the surface complexation site-binding model. Geochimica et Cosmochimica A eta, 49,1931 -1941. [Pg.559]

Pt surfaces tend to restructure into overlayers with an even higher density of Pt atoms than the close-packed (111) surface [21]. The Pt atoms are closer to each other on the reconstructed surfaces than in the (111) surface. The overlap matrix elements and hence the bandwidth are therefore larger, the d bands are lower and consequently these reconstructed surfaces bind CO even weaker than the (111) surface. The reconstructed Pt surfaces are examples of strained overlayers. The effect of strain can be studied theoretically by simply straining a slab. Examples of continuous changes in the d band center and in the stability of adsorbed CO due to strain are included in Figure 4.10. The effect due to variations in the number of layers of a thin film of one metal on another can also be described in the d band model [22,23]. [Pg.271]

Fig. 5. Models of the receptor-G protein complex. Two representations of receptor-G protein complexes are shown. The R Ga(0) fly complex created by manually docking the G protein onto an activated receptor model based on the rhodopsin crystal structure (1GZM) (left panel). Sites on Got that cross-link to residue S240 (cyan sphere) on the receptor are highlighted (cyan). This sort of data will be critical for improving models of the receptor-G protein complex, as it provides constraints for the location of IC 3 relatively to Ga. In this model, the nucleotide-binding pocket is some 30 A away from the receptor-binding surface. The model of an Ro Ga (O) [jy-com pIex is based on coordinates generously provided by K. Palczewski (published in Fotiadis et al, 2004). Fig. 5. Models of the receptor-G protein complex. Two representations of receptor-G protein complexes are shown. The R Ga(0) fly complex created by manually docking the G protein onto an activated receptor model based on the rhodopsin crystal structure (1GZM) (left panel). Sites on Got that cross-link to residue S240 (cyan sphere) on the receptor are highlighted (cyan). This sort of data will be critical for improving models of the receptor-G protein complex, as it provides constraints for the location of IC 3 relatively to Ga. In this model, the nucleotide-binding pocket is some 30 A away from the receptor-binding surface. The model of an Ro Ga (O) [jy-com pIex is based on coordinates generously provided by K. Palczewski (published in Fotiadis et al, 2004).

See other pages where Surface binding model is mentioned: [Pg.110]    [Pg.133]    [Pg.110]    [Pg.133]    [Pg.102]    [Pg.334]    [Pg.13]    [Pg.20]    [Pg.236]    [Pg.180]    [Pg.64]    [Pg.79]    [Pg.492]    [Pg.496]    [Pg.22]    [Pg.47]    [Pg.47]    [Pg.627]    [Pg.126]    [Pg.133]    [Pg.421]    [Pg.430]    [Pg.443]    [Pg.474]    [Pg.446]    [Pg.452]    [Pg.159]    [Pg.958]    [Pg.986]    [Pg.361]    [Pg.362]    [Pg.163]    [Pg.232]    [Pg.158]    [Pg.188]    [Pg.192]    [Pg.167]    [Pg.111]    [Pg.111]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.133 ]




SEARCH



Surface binding

© 2024 chempedia.info