Isosteric heat of hydrogen adsorption on MOFs: comparison between adsorption calorimetry, sorption isosteric method, and analytical models
- 952 Downloads
Isosteric heat of adsorption is an important parameter required to describe the thermal performance of adsorptive storage systems. It is most frequently calculated from adsorption isotherms measured over wide ranges of pressure and temperature, using the so-called adsorption isosteric method. Direct quantitative estimation of isosteric heats on the other hand is possible using the coupled calorimetric–volumetric method, which involves simultaneous measurement of heat and adsorption. In this work, we compare the isosteric heats of hydrogen adsorption on microporous materials measured by both methods. Furthermore, the experimental data are compared with the isosteric heats obtained using the modified Dubinin–Astakhov, Tóth, and Unilan adsorption analytical models to establish the reliability and limitations of simpler methods and assumptions. To this end, we measure the hydrogen isosteric heats on five prototypical metal–organic frameworks: MOF-5, Cu-BTC, Fe-BTC, MIL-53, and MOF-177 using both experimental methods. For all MOFs, we find a very good agreement between the isosteric heats measured using the calorimetric and isosteric methods throughout the range of loading studied. Models’ prediction on the other hand deviates from both experiments depending on the MOF studied and the range of loading. Under low-loadings of less than 5 mol kg−1, the isosteric heat of hydrogen adsorption decreases in the order Cu-BTC > MIL-53 > MOF-5 > Fe-BTC > MOF-177. The order of isosteric heats is coherent with the strength of hydrogen interaction revealed from previous thermal desorption spectroscopy measurements.
KeywordsHydrogen Adsorption Isosteric Heat Thermal Desorption Spectroscopy Excess Adsorption Explicit Analytical Expression
The Canadian contribution is based on research financially supported by NSERC and Air Liquide. The German contribution was partially funded by the German Research Foundation (SPP 1362), the European Commission DG Research (SES6-2006-518271/NESSHY) and the European Hy-Co program, financed by the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi).
- 1.J.K.N. Newhouse, in Proceedings of Annual Merit Review Meetings of US DOE (2014), http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/review14/st047_newhouse_2014_o.pdf
- 4.S. Ubaid, R. Zacharia, J. Xiao, R. Chahine, P. Bénard, P. Tessier, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 40, 9314 (2015) Google Scholar
- 11.A. Dailly, J.J. Vajo, C.C. Ahn, J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110 (1099)Google Scholar
- 19.N.P. Stadie, Dissertation (Ph.D.), California Institute of Technology (2013)Google Scholar
- 20.J. Purewal, Dissertation (Ph.D.), California Institute of Technology (2010)Google Scholar
- 22.E.W. Lemmon, M.L. Huber, M.O. McLinden, in NIST Standard Reference Database 23: Reference Fluid Thermodynamic and Transport Properties-REFPROP, Version 9.1, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Standard Reference Data Program, Gaithersburg, 2013 (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2013)Google Scholar
- 26.G. Dorval-Douville, Master Thesis, Université du Québec a trois rivieres (2006)Google Scholar
- 27.A. Mouahid, D. Bessieres, F. Plantier, G. Pijaudier-Cabot, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2012, 109 (1077)Google Scholar
- 32.F.o. Rouquerol, J. Rouquerol, K.S.W. Sing, Adsorption by Powders and Porous Solids: Principles, Methodology, and Applications (Academic Press, San Diego, 1999)Google Scholar
- 35.S. Maurice, Ph.D. Thesis, Max-Planck-Institut für Intelligente Systeme, Stuttgart (2012)Google Scholar