4.7 Article

Effect of Mg content on structure, hydrogen storage properties and thermal stability of melt-spun Mgx(LaNi3)100-x alloys

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 39, 期 17, 页码 9267-9275

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.04.044

关键词

Mg-x(LaNi3)(100-x); Amorphous structure; Hydrogen desorption kinetics; Thermal stabilities

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51261003]
  2. Natural Foundations of Guangxi Province [2012GXNSFGA060002, 201201ZD009]
  3. Guangxi Experiment Center Of Information Science [20130113]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Amorphous Mg-x(LaNi3)(100-x) (x = 40, 50, 60, 70) alloys with ribbon shape (5 mm wide, 0.2 mm thick) have been prepared by rapid solidification, using a melt-spinning technique. Their microstructure, hydrogen storage properties and thermal stability were studied by means of XRD, SEM, PCTPro2000 and DSC analysis, respectively. The results indicated that when Mg-x(LaNi3)(100-x) alloys have been hydrogenated at 573 K under 2 MPa hydrogen pressure, LaH3 phase is formed in the case of x (x = 40, 50, 60, 70), Mg2NiH4 phase formed in the case of x (x = 40, 50, 60, 70), Mg2NiH0.3 phase formed in the case of x (x = 40, 50), and MgH2 phase formed in the case of x = 70. Experimental data of hydrogen desorption kinetics, tested at 523 K, 573 K and 623 K, are in good agreement with Avrami-Erofeev equation. The maximum hydrogen absorption capacity is 2.71 wt.% for Mg-70(LaNi3)(30) and 2.35 wt.% for Mg-70(LaNi3)(30), the increase of hydrogen desorption capacity is in the order of x = 70 > x = 60 > x = 50 > x = 40. Based on DSC analysis, the activation energies for dehydrogenation of these samples are calculated to be 122 +/- 2 kJ/mol (x = 40) > 101 +/- 3 kJ/mol (x = 50) > 84 +/- 5 kJ/mol (x = 60) > 64 +/- 3 kJ/mol (x = 70), which are in agreement with the results of hydrogen desorption kinetics. Copyright (C) 2014, Hydrogen Energy Publications, LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据