A Comparison of Methods for Determining Surface Areas of Carbon Black

Abstract

Abstract 1. The various tint tests correlate with each other—it does not make much difference which of the three procedures is used. The discrimination between similar blacks is comparable. Specific surface areas obtained by the three methods are comparable and differences appear to be due to experimental errors. (Compare Figures 5–7). 2. Surface areas larger than some 90 to 100 m2/g cannot be reliably determined from tint strength measurements alone. 3. Structure exerts a pronounced effect on tint strength of furnace blacks, especially above 90 to 100 m2/g. Porosity and/or composition are apparently also variables which affect tinting strength. 4. Densichron reflectance on the dry carbon black can be used to estimate specific surface areas up to about 140 m2/g; but, since theabsoluteerrorincreases as the specific surface area increases, this method loses some of its reliability at values above about 110 m2/g. The relative error in reflectance determinations does not vary greatly over the furnace-black range. Densichron reflectance is influenced by composition, evidently due to composition-related differences in optical properties of the carbons. 5. In CTAB adsorption measurements, titration errors and handling errors tend to be rather constant for blacks of different surface area. Hence, CTAB permits better discrimination among blacks of small particle size. 6. The errors in Densichron reflectance surface area increase with specific surface area. Hence, the deviations between CTAB and reflectance surface area which are due to experimental error increase with the surface area of the sample.