Abstract
The adsorption energy distributions derived from the Adamson and Ling (AL), and the House and Jaycock HILDA numerical methods are compared with the Sips analytical solution, which is used as a benchmark for these numerical methods. Excellent agreement between the analytical and numerical methods is achieved provided that the isotherm data are measured over a wide range of adsorbate partial pressures, extending to near the saturation capacity. While a lack of accurate low-pressure data will merely result in an inaccurate energy distribution in the high-energy range, a lack of these high-pressure data may result in an entirely wrong energy distribution.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.