4.6 Article

A Case Study of Waste Scrap Tyre-Derived Carbon Black Tested for Nitrogen, Carbon Dioxide, and Cyclohexane Adsorption

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 25, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules25194445

关键词

sorption; CO2; cyclohexane; N-2; waste scrap tyres; carbon black

资金

  1. ERDF [CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000853]
  2. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic [LM2018098]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Waste scrap tyres were thermally decomposed at the temperature of 600 degrees C and heating rate of 10 degrees C center dot min(-1). Decomposition was followed by the TG analysis. The resulting pyrolytic carbon black was chemically activated by a KOH solution at 800 degrees C. Activated and non-activated carbon black were investigated using high pressure thermogravimetry, where adsorption isotherms of N-2, CO2, and cyclohexane were determined. Isotherms were determined over a wide range of pressure, 0.03-4.5 MPa for N-2 and 0.03-2 MPa for CO2. In non-activated carbon black, for the same pressure and temperature, a five times greater gas uptake of CO2 than N-2 was determined. Contrary to non-activated carbon black, activated carbon black showed improved textural properties with a well-developed irregular mesoporous-macroporous structure with a significant amount of micropores. The sorption capacity of pyrolytic carbon black was also increased by activation. The uptake of CO2 was three times and for cyclohexane ten times higher in activated carbon black than in the non-activated one. Specific surface areas evaluated from linearized forms of Langmuir isotherm and the BET isotherm revealed that for both methods, the values are comparable for non-activated carbon black measured by CO2 and for activated carbon black measured by cyclohexane. It was found out that the N-2 sorption capacity of carbon black depends only on its specific surface area size, contrary to CO2 sorption capacity, which is affected by both the size of specific surface area and the nature of carbon black.

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

4.6
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