Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Pure and Applied Chemistry

The Scientific Journal of IUPAC

Ed. by Burrows, Hugh / Weir, Ron / Stohner, Jürgen

12 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 2.626
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 3.210

CiteScore 2016: 2.45

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.972
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 1.049

Online
ISSN
1365-3075
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 87, Issue 9-10

Issues

Physisorption of gases, with special reference to the evaluation of surface area and pore size distribution (IUPAC Technical Report)

Matthias Thommes
  • Corresponding author
  • Applied Science Department, Quantachrome Instruments, 1900 Corporate Drive, Boynton Beach, FL, USA
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Katsumi Kaneko
  • Center for Energy and Environmental Science, Shinshu University, 4-17-1 Wakasato, Nagano-city, Japan
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Alexander V. Neimark
  • Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Rutgers University, 98 Brett Road, Piscataway, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ James P. Olivier / Francisco Rodriguez-Reinoso
  • Laboratorio de Materiales Avanzados, Departamento de Química Inorgánica, Universidad de Alicante, Apartado 99, Alicante, Spain
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Jean Rouquerol / Kenneth S.W. Sing
Published Online: 2015-07-02 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2014-1117

Abstract

Gas adsorption is an important tool for the characterisation of porous solids and fine powders. Major advances in recent years have made it necessary to update the 1985 IUPAC manual on Reporting Physisorption Data for Gas/Solid Systems. The aims of the present document are to clarify and standardise the presentation, nomenclature and methodology associated with the application of physisorption for surface area assessment and pore size analysis and to draw attention to remaining problems in the interpretation of physisorption data.

Keywords: IUPAC Physical and Biophysical Chemistry Division; nanostructured materials

Article note:

Sponsoring body: IUPAC Division of Physical and Biophysical Chemistry Division.

1 Introduction

Gas adsorption is a well-established tool for the characterisation of the texture of porous solids and fine powders. In 1985 an IUPAC manual was issued on “Reporting Physisorption Data for Gas/Solid Systems”, with special reference to the determination of surface area and porosity. The conclusions and recommendations in the 1985 document have been broadly accepted by the scientific and industrial community [1].

Over the past 30 years major advances have been made in the development of nanoporous materials with uniform, tailor-made pore structures (e.g., mesoporous molecular sieves, carbon nanotubes and nanohorns and materials with hierarchical pore structures). Their characterisation has required the development of high resolution experimental protocols for the adsorption of various subcritical fluids (e.g., nitrogen at T=77 K, argon at 87 K, carbon dioxide at 273 K) and also organic vapours and supercritical gases. Furthermore, novel procedures based on density functional theory and molecular simulation (e.g., Monte–Carlo simulations) have been developed to allow a more accurate and comprehensive pore structural analysis to be obtained from high resolution physisorption data. It is evident that these new procedures, terms and concepts now necessitate an update and extension of the 1985 recommendations. Hence, this document is focused on the following objectives:

  1. to provide authoritative, up-to-date guidance on gas physisorption methodology;

  2. to discuss the advantages and limitations of using physisorption techniques for studying solid surfaces and pore structures with particular reference to the assessment of surface area and pore size distribution.

The principal aim of this document is to clarify and standardise the presentation, nomenclature and methodology associated with the use of gas physisorption as an analytical tool and in different areas of pure and applied research.

2 General definitions and terminology

The definitions given here are in line with those put forward in the 1985 IUPAC Recommendation [1], while the symbols used are those given in the 2007 edition of the IUPAC manual “Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry”. Where a caveat is added, it is intended to draw attention to a conceptual difficulty or to a particular aspect which requires further consideration.

In general, adsorption is defined as the enrichment of molecules, atoms or ions in the vicinity of an interface. In the case of gas/solid systems, adsorption takes place in the vicinity of the solid surface and outside the solid structure. The material in the adsorbed state is known as the adsorbate, while the adsorptive is the same component in the fluid phase. The adsorption space is the space occupied by the adsorbate. Adsorption can be physical (physisorption) or chemical (chemisorption). Physisorption is a general phenomenon: it occurs whenever an adsorbable gas (the adsorptive) is brought into contact with the surface of a solid (the adsorbent). The intermolecular forces involved are of the same kind as those responsible for the imperfection of real gases and the condensation of vapours. In addition to the attractive dispersion forces and the short range repulsive forces, specific molecular interactions (e.g., polarisation, field-dipole, field gradient-quadrupole) usually occur as a result of particular geometric and electronic properties of the adsorbent and adsorptive. In chemisorption, which is not dealt with in this document, the intermolecular forces involved lead to the formation of chemical bonds.

When the molecules of the adsorptive penetrate the surface layer and enter the structure of the bulk solid, the term absorption is used. It is sometimes difficult or impossible to distinguish between adsorption and absorption: it is then convenient to use the wider term sorption which embraces both phenomena, and to use the derived terms sorbent, sorbate and sorptive.

When the term adsorption is used to denote the onward process of adsorption, its counterpart is desorption, which denotes the converse process, in which the amount adsorbed progressively decreases. The terms adsorption and desorption are then used adjectivally to indicate the direction from which experimentally determined amounts adsorbed have been approached – by reference to the adsorption curve (or point), or to the desorption curve (or point). Adsorption hysteresis arises when the adsorption and desorption curves do not coincide.

The adsorption system is comprised of three zones: solid, gas and the adsorption space (e.g., the adsorbed layer) whose content is the amount adsorbed na. Evaluation of na is dependent on the volume, Va, of the adsorption space, which is an unknown quantity in the absence of additional information. To address this issue, Gibbs proposed a model for assessing accurately an intermediate quantity called the surface excess amount nσ. Adsorption is here assumed to be totally two-dimensional (Va = 0) and to take place on an imaginary surface (Gibbs dividing surface, or GDS) which, in the case of gas adsorption, limits the volume Vg available for a homogeneous gas phase. Calculating the amount ng in the gas phase in equilibrium with the adsorbent is then carried out by application of the appropriate gas laws. The difference between n (the total amount of adsorptive introduced in the system) and ng is the surface excess amount nσ.

Strictly speaking, the quantity experimentally determined by adsorption manometry or gravimetry is a surface excess amount nσ. However, for the adsorption of vapours under 0.1 MPa, which is the main concern of this document, na and nσ can be considered to be almost identical, provided the latter is calculated with a surface (the GDS) very close to the adsorbent surface. This requires an accurate determination of the void volume (gas adsorption manometry) or of the buoyancy (gas adsorption gravimetry) [see Section 3 and Ref. 2].

For gas adsorption measurements at higher pressures, the difference between na and nσ cannot be ignored. Then, the experimental surface excess data can be converted into the corresponding amounts adsorbed, provided that the volumes of the adsorption space (Va) and solid adsorbent (Vs) are known. In the simplest case, when the GDS exactly coincides with the actual adsorbing surface [2], the amount adsorbed na is given by

na=nσ+cgVa (1)(1)

The relation, at constant temperature, between the amount adsorbed, na (or, alternatively, the surface excess amount nσ), and the equilibrium pressure of the gas is known as the adsorption isotherm. The way the pressure is plotted depends on whether the adsorption is carried out at a temperature under or above the critical temperature of the adsorptive. At an adsorption temperature below the critical point, one usually adopts the relative pressure p/p°, where p is the equilibrium pressure and p° the saturation vapour pressure at the adsorption temperature. At an adsorption temperature above the critical one, where there is no condensation and no p° exists, one must necessarily use the equilibrium pressure p.

The surface of a solid can be considered and defined at different levels (cf Fig. 1). At the atomic scale, the van der Waals surface (Fig. 1, 1) is formed by the outer part of the van der Waals spheres of the surface atoms. The second surface, which is assessed by physisorption, does not coincide with the van der Waals surface. This surface is known in simulation studies as the Connolly surface (Fig. 1, 2) and is defined as the surface drawn by the bottom of a spherical probe molecule rolling over the van der Waals surface; this is the probe-accessible surface. The r-distance surface (Fig. 1, 3) is located at distance r from the Connolly surface.

Schematic representation of several possible surfaces of an adsorbent. 1: van der Waals; 2: Connolly, Probe-accessible; 3: Accessible, r-distance.
Fig. 1:

Schematic representation of several possible surfaces of an adsorbent. 1: van der Waals; 2: Connolly, Probe-accessible; 3: Accessible, r-distance.

In the case of porous adsorbents, the surface can be subdivided into an external surface and an internal surface, but with two different meanings: (i) in the general case, the external surface is defined as the surface outside the pores, while the internal surface is then the surface of all pore walls; and (ii) in the presence of microporosity it has become customary to define the external surface as the non-microporous surface. In practice, whatever definition is chosen, the method of assessment and the pore size and shape distribution must be taken into account. Because the accessibility of pores is dependent on the size and shape of the probe molecules, the recorded values of internal area and pore volume may depend on the dimensions of the adsorptive molecules (packing and molecular sieve effects). The roughness of a solid surface may be characterised by a roughness factor, i.e., the ratio of the external surface to the chosen geometric surface. Pore morphology describes the geometrical shape and structure of the pores, including pore width and volume as well as the roughness of the pore walls. Porosity is defined as the ratio of the total pore volume to the volume of the particle or agglomerate.

In the context of physisorption, it is expedient to classify pores according to their size (IUPAC recommendation, 1985[1]):

  1. pores with widths exceeding about 50 nm are called macropores;

  2. pores of widths between 2 nm and 50 nm are called mesopores;

  3. pores with widths not exceeding about 2 nm are called micropores.

These limits, which were suggested by the analysis of nitrogen (77 K) adsorption-desorption isotherms are therefore to some extent arbitrary. Nevertheless, they are still useful and broadly accepted.

The term nanopore embraces the above three categories of pores, but with an upper limit ∼ 100 nm.

The whole of the accessible volume present in micropores may be regarded as adsorption space. The process which then occurs is micropore filling, as distinct from the surface coverage which takes place on the walls of open macropores or mesopores. In the case of micropore filling, the interpretation of the adsorption isotherm only in terms of surface coverage is incorrect. Micropore filling may be regarded as a primary physisorption process (see Section 6). It is often useful to distinguish between the narrow micropores (also called ultramicropores) of approximate width < 0.7 nm and wide micropores (also called supermicropores).

Physisorption in mesopores takes place in three more or less distinct stages. In monolayer adsorption all the adsorbed molecules are in contact with the surface layer of the adsorbent. In multilayer adsorption the adsorption space accommodates more than one layer of molecules so that not all the adsorbed molecules are in direct contact with the adsorbent surface. In mesopores, multilayer adsorption is followed by pore condensation. Capillary (or pore) condensation is the phenomenon whereby a gas condenses to a liquid-like phase in a pore at a pressure p less than the saturation pressure p° of the bulk liquid; i.e., capillary condensation reflects a vapour-liquid phase transition in a finite-volume system. The term capillary (or pore) condensation should not be used to describe micropore filling because it does not involve a vapour-liquid phase transition.

For physisorption, the monolayer capacity (nam) is usually defined as the amount of adsorbate sufficient to cover the surface with a complete monolayer of molecules. In some cases this may be a close-packed array but in others the adsorbate may adopt a different structure. Quantities relating to monolayer capacity may be denoted by the subscript m. The surface coverage (θ) for both monolayer and multilayer adsorption is defined as the ratio of the amount of adsorbed substance to the monolayer capacity. The surface area (As) of the adsorbent may be calculated from the monolayer capacity, provided that the area (σm) effectively occupied by an adsorbed molecule in the complete monolayer is known. Thus,

As=namLσm (2)(2)

where L is the Avogadro constant. The specific surface area (as) refers to unit mass of adsorbent:

as=As/m (3)(3)

The IUPAC manual of Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry [3] recommends the symbols A, As or S and a, as or s for area and specific area, respectively, but As and as are preferred to avoid confusion with Helmholtz energy A or entropy S.

Energetic data of physisorption can be assessed directly by adsorption calorimetry: the curve obtained of differential energies of adsorption Δadsu˙ or differential enthalpies of adsorption, Δadsh˙ (i.e., Δadsu˙RT for an ideal gas) vs. amount adsorbed na allows one to study the energetics of surface coverage or micropore filling. The use of the term “heat of adsorption” is discouraged since it does not correspond to any well-defined thermodynamic change of state. The energetic data can also be assessed indirectly from adsorption isotherms obtained at different temperatures (i.e., the “isosteric” method, based on the use of the Clausius–Clapeyron equation) and this leads, for a given amount adsorbed, to the so-called “isosteric heatqst Strictly this quantity is more meaningful than a simple “heat”, since it is equal, with opposite sign, to Δadsh˙. For this reason, the term “isosteric heat” is preferably replaced by the term isosteric enthalpy of adsorption. For both experimental and theoretical reasons, the calorimetric method is considered to be more reliable than the isosteric method, especially if one is studying micropore filling or the phase behaviour of the adsorbate.

3 Methodology and experimental procedure

3.1 The determination of physisorption isotherms

The various types of apparatus used for the determination of physisorption isotherms may be divided into two groups, depending on: (a) measurement of the amount of gas removed from the gas phase (i.e., manometric methods) and (b) direct measurement of the uptake of gas (i.e., gravimetric measurement of the change in mass of the adsorbent). In practice, static or dynamic techniques may be used in either case. As mentioned in Section 2, the surface excess amount is the quantity experimentally determined. For the adsorption of vapours below 100 kPa (1 bar) (e.g., N2, Ar, Kr adsorption at cryogenic temperatures) the surface excess amount and the total amount adsorbed can be considered to be essentially identical (see Section 2).

A static manometric determination entails the measurement of changes of pressure of calibrated gas volumes: a known amount of pure gas is admitted to a confined, calibrated volume containing the adsorbent, which is maintained at constant temperature. As adsorption takes place, the pressure in the confined volume falls until equilibrium is established. The amount of gas adsorbed at the equilibrium pressure is given as the difference between the amount of gas admitted and the amount of gas required to fill the space around the adsorbent, i.e., the dead space. The adsorption isotherm is usually constructed point-by-point by admission of successive charges of gas to the adsorbent with the aid of a dosing technique and application of the appropriate gas laws. The volume of the dead space must, of course, be known accurately: it is obtained either by pre-calibration of the confined volume and subtracting the volume of the adsorbent (calculated from its density or by the admission of a gas which is adsorbed to a negligible extent). It is important to understand that the determination of the dead space usually accounts for the largest element of uncertainty in the total error inventory of the measured adsorbed amount.

A ‘continuous’ procedure can be used to construct the isotherm under quasi-equilibrium conditions: the pure adsorptive is admitted to (or removed from) the system at a slow and constant rate and a manometric or gravimetric technique used to follow the variation of the amount adsorbed with increase (or decrease) in pressure. In such measurements involving gas flow it is essential to confirm that the results are not affected by change in flow rate and to check the agreement with representative isotherms determined by a static method.

Two different carrier gas techniques may be employed to study the amount adsorbed. Inverse gas chromatography, which involves an elution phenomenon and the determination of a retention time, is mainly applied for studies in the low monolayer coverage (or micropore filling) region, although it has been used, apparently satisfactorily, up to monolayer coverage [2]. Adsorption/desorption under carrier gas (i.e., the Nelson and Eggertsen flow method [4]) also allows one to construct an adsorption/desorption isotherm, but this technique is frequently only applied for a single point surface area assessment. Both techniques require that the adsorption of the carrier gas be negligible.

Developments in vacuum microbalance techniques have maintained an interest in gravimetric methods for the determination of adsorption isotherms. With the aid of an adsorption balance the change in weight of the adsorbent may be followed directly during both the outgassing and adsorption/desorption stages. A gravimetric procedure is especially convenient for measurements with vapours (e.g., water vapour or some organic adsorptives) at temperatures not too far removed from ambient. At low temperatures (in particular at cryogenic temperatures), however, it can become difficult to control convection effects and to measure the exact temperature of the adsorbent.

The manometric method is generally considered the most suitable technique for undertaking physisorption measurements with nitrogen, argon, and krypton at cryogenic temperatures (i.e., 77 and 87 K, the boiling temperature of nitrogen and argon, respectively). In recent years, excellent commercial adsorption equipment has been developed and installed in almost every organisation concerned with the production and characterisation of nanoporous materials. Detailed descriptions of manometric methods (and the corresponding computational procedures) are not given here because they are available in recently published books and reviews.

Pore size analysis of nanoporous adsorbents over the complete micropore and mesopore range requires physisorption experiments which can span a broad spectrum of pressures (up to seven orders of magnitude) starting at ultralow pressures below 1 Pa (0.01 mbar). Hence, in order to study the adsorption of gases such as nitrogen and argon (at their boiling temperatures) within the relative pressure range 10–7p/p0 ≤ 1 with sufficiently high accuracy, it is necessary to use special equipment, which ensures that the sample cell and the manifold can be evacuated to very low pressures with a highly efficient turbomolecular vacuum pumping system. Also, a combination of different pressure transducers, which cover various pressure ranges, is required. Another complication in the ultra-low pressure range is that for gas pressures below ca. 0.1 mbar (i.e., p/p0 < 10–4) for nitrogen and argon adsorption at 77 K and 87 K, respectively, pressure differences along the capillary of the sample bulb due to the Knudsen effect have to be taken into account. Hence, a thermal transpiration correction must be applied in order to obtain accurate data. Care must also be taken to properly select the equilibration conditions. Too short an equilibration time may lead to under-equilibrated data and isotherms shifted to too high relative pressures. Under-equilibration is often an issue in the very low relative pressure region of the isotherm, since equilibration in narrow micropores tends to be very slow. For highest accuracy the saturation pressure p° should be recorded for every datum point (by means of a dedicated saturation pressure transducer), this is most important for providing acceptable accuracy in the measurement of p/p0 at high pressures, which is particularly important for evaluation of the size distribution of larger mesopores.

It is important to ensure that the purity of the adsorptive is not less than 99.999 %. In addition, the accuracy of the results depends on careful preparation and sampling of the adsorbent (see Section 3.3).

3.2 Dead space (void volume) determination

In the application of a manometric technique involving a dosing procedure it must be kept in mind that systematic errors in the measured doses of gas are cumulative and that the amount remaining unadsorbed in the dead space becomes increasingly important as the pressure increases. Hence, in order to correctly determine the amount adsorbed, an accurate knowledge of the dead space (i.e., the effective void volume) is crucial and can be determined before or after the measurement of the adsorption isotherm. The standard procedure uses a non-adsorbing gas such as helium to measure the dead space under the operational conditions. However, the use of helium for the dead space calibration may be problematic [2, 4, 5]. Recent investigations have confirmed that nanoporous solids with very narrow micropores may adsorb non-negligible amounts of helium at liquid nitrogen temperature (helium entrapment). If the entrapped helium is not removed prior to the analysis this can affect significantly the shape of the adsorption isotherm in the ultra-low pressure range [5]. Therefore, it is recommended that the sample should be outgassed after its exposure to helium, at least at room temperature, before continuing the manometric analysis.

It is advantageous to avoid the use of helium if the adsorbent consists of extremely narrow micropores, when in contrast to helium the entry of nitrogen or argon molecules is restricted, due to diffusion limitations. This situation arises with some zeolites and activated carbons. One way to avoid this problem is to determine the volume of the empty sample cell at ambient temperature using the adsorptive (e.g., nitrogen) followed by the measurement of a calibration curve (with the empty sample cell) performed under the same operational conditions as the adsorption measurements. This calibration curve essentially represents a multipoint dead space determination; the necessary correction for the sample volume can be made by means of the sample density (i.e., skeletal density).

3.3 Outgassing the adsorbent

Prior to the determination of an adsorption isotherm all of the physisorbed species should be removed from the surface of the adsorbent while avoiding irreversible changes of the surface or the solid structure. This may be achieved by outgassing, i.e., exposure of the surface to a high vacuum (for microporous materials, pressures <1 Pa are desirable) usually at elevated temperature. To obtain reproducible isotherms, it is necessary to control the outgassing conditions (the heating programme, the change in pressure over the adsorbent and the residual pressure) to within limits which depend on the nature of the adsorbent. With sensitive samples, a sample-controlled heating programme is recommended, which also reduces the risk of fine powder elutriation if the adsorbent is outgassed under high vacuum [2].

While outgassing under vacuum is the recommended method for microporous materials, it is sometimes expedient to achieve adequate cleanliness of the surface of non-microporous materials by flushing the adsorbent with an inert gas (which may be the adsorptive) at elevated temperature. To monitor the progress of outgassing, it is useful to follow the change in gas pressure by means of suitable vacuum gauges and, if the experimental technique permits, the change in weight of the adsorbent. Further information on the effect of outgassing may be obtained by the application of temperature programmed desorption in association with evolved gas analysis (e.g., using mass spectrometry). The conditions chosen for pretreatment of the adsorbent must be carefully controlled and recorded (i.e., the outgassing time and temperature and the residual pressure, or the conditions of flushing with adsorptive).

4 Evaluation of adsorption data

4.1 Presentation of primary data

The quantity of gas adsorbed is measured in any convenient units, but for the presentation of the data, it is recommended that the amount adsorbed should be expressed in moles per gram of outgassed adsorbent. If possible, the composition of the adsorbent should be specified and its surface characterised. To facilitate the comparison of adsorption data, it is recommended that adsorption isotherms are displayed in graphical form with the amount adsorbed (preferably in mol·g–1) plotted against the equilibrium relative pressure (p/p0), where p0 is the saturation pressure of the pure adsorptive at the operational temperature, or against p, when the temperature is above the critical temperature of the adsorptive. If the adsorption measurements are made under conditions where the gas phase deviates appreciably from ideality (e.g., at high pressure), it is desirable that the isotherms should be presented in terms of gas fugacity rather than pressure.

4.2 Classification of physisorption isotherms

In the 1985 IUPAC recommendations physisorption isotherms were grouped into six types [1]. However, over the past 30 years various new characteristic types of isotherms have been identified and shown to be closely related to particular pore structures. Therefore, we now consider it expedient to refine the original IUPAC classifications of physisorption isotherms and associated hysteresis loops. The proposed updated classification of physisorption isotherms is shown in Fig. 2.

Classification of physisorption isotherms.
Fig. 2:

Classification of physisorption isotherms.

Reversible Type I isotherms are given by microporous solids having relatively small external surfaces (e.g., some activated carbons, molecular sieve zeolites and certain porous oxides). A Type I isotherm is concave to the p/p0 axis and the amount adsorbed approaches a limiting value. This limiting uptake is governed by the accessible micropore volume rather than by the internal surface area. A steep uptake at very low p/p0 is due to enhanced adsorbent-adsorptive interactions in narrow micropores (micropores of molecular dimensions), resulting in micropore filling at very low p/p0. For nitrogen and argon adsorption at 77 K and 87 K, Type I(a) isotherms are given by microporous materials having mainly narrow micropores (of width < ∼ 1 nm); Type I(b) isotherms are found with materials having pore size distributions over a broader range including wider micropores and possibly narrow mesopores (< ∼ 2.5 nm).

Reversible Type II isotherms are given by the physisorption of most gases on nonporous or macroporous adsorbents. The shape is the result of unrestricted monolayer-multilayer adsorption up to high p/p0. If the knee is sharp, Point B – the beginning of the middle almost linear section – usually corresponds to the completion of monolayer coverage. A more gradual curvature (i.e., a less distinctive Point B) is an indication of a significant amount of overlap of monolayer coverage and the onset of multilayer adsorption. The thickness of the adsorbed multilayer generally appears to increase without limit when p/p0 = 1.

In the case of a Type III isotherm, there is no Point B and therefore no identifiable monolayer formation; the adsorbent-adsorbate interactions are now relatively weak and the adsorbed molecules are clustered around the most favorable sites on the surface of a nonporous or macroporous solid. In contrast to a Type II isotherm, the amount adsorbed remains finite at the saturation pressure (i.e., at p/p0 = 1).

Type IV isotherms are given by mesoporous adsorbents (e.g., many oxide gels, industrial adsorbents and mesoporous molecular sieves). The adsorption behaviour in mesopores is determined by the adsorbent-adsorptive interactions and also by the interactions between the molecules in the condensed state. In this case, the initial monolayer-multilayer adsorption on the mesopore walls, which takes the same path as the corresponding part of a Type II isotherm, is followed by pore condensation. As already mentioned in Section 2, pore condensation is the phenomenon whereby a gas condenses to a liquid-like phase in a pore at a pressure p less than the saturation pressure p0 of the bulk liquid [6, 7]. A typical feature of Type IV isotherms is a final saturation plateau, of variable length (sometimes reduced to a mere inflexion point).

In the case of a Type IVa isotherm, capillary condensation is accompanied by hysteresis. This occurs when the pore width exceeds a certain critical width, which is dependent on the adsorption system and temperature (e.g., for nitrogen and argon adsorption in cylindrical pores at 77 K and 87 K, respectively, hysteresis starts to occur for pores wider than ∼ 4 nm) [4, 6, 8]. With adsorbents having mesopores of smaller width, completely reversible Type IVb isotherms are observed. In principle, Type IVb isotherms are also given by conical and cylindrical mesopores that are closed at the tapered end.

In the low p/p0 range, the Type V isotherm shape is very similar to that of Type III and this can be attributed to relatively weak adsorbent–adsorbate interactions. At higher p/p0, molecular clustering is followed by pore filling. For instance, Type V isotherms are observed for water adsorption on hydrophobic microporous and mesoporous adsorbents.

The reversible stepwise Type VI isotherm is representative of layer-by-layer adsorption on a highly uniform nonporous surface. The step-height now represents the capacity for each adsorbed layer, while the sharpness of the step is dependent on the system and the temperature. Amongst the best examples of Type VI isotherms are those obtained with argon or krypton at low temperature on graphitised carbon blacks.

4.3 Adsorption hysteresis

4.3.1 Origin of hysteresis

Reproducible, permanent hysteresis loops, which are located in the multilayer range of physisorption isotherms, are generally associated with capillary condensation. This form of hysteresis can be attributed to adsorption metastability and/or network effects. In an open-ended pore (e.g., of cylindrical geometry), delayed condensation is the result of metastability of the adsorbed multilayer. It follows that in an assembly of such pores the adsorption branch of the hysteresis loop is not in thermodynamic equilibrium. Since evaporation does not involve nucleation, the desorption stage is equivalent to a reversible liquid–vapour transition. Therefore, if the pores are filled with liquid-like condensate, thermodynamic equilibration is established on the desorption branch [6–8].

In more complex pore structures, the desorption path is often dependent on network effects and various forms of pore blocking. These phenomena occur if wide pores have access to the external surface only through narrow necks (e.g., ink-bottle pore shape). The wide pores are filled as before and remain filled during desorption until the narrow necks empty at lower vapour pressures. In a pore network, the desorption vapour pressures are dependent on the size and spatial distribution of the necks. If the neck diameters are not too small, the network may empty at a relative pressure corresponding to a characteristic percolation threshold. Then, useful information concerning the neck size can be obtained from the desorption branch of the isotherm.

Theoretical and experimental studies have revealed [6–8] that if the neck diameter is smaller than a critical size (estimated to be ca. 5–6 nm for nitrogen at 77 K), the mechanism of desorption from the larger pores involves cavitation (i.e., the spontaneous nucleation and growth of gas bubbles in the metastable condensed fluid). Cavitation controlled evaporation has been found for instance with certain micro-mesoporous silicas, mesoporous zeolites, clays, and also some activated carbons. Contrary to the situation of pore blocking/percolation controlled evaporation no quantitative information about the neck size and neck size distribution can be obtained in the case of cavitation.

4.3.2 Types of hysteresis loops

Many different shapes of hysteresis loops have been reported, but the main types are shown in Fig. 3. Types H1, H2(a), H3 and H4 were identified in the original IUPAC classification of 1985, which is now extended in the light of more recent findings. Each of these six characteristic types is fairly closely related to particular features of the pore structure and underlying adsorption mechanism.

Classification of hysteresis loops.
Fig. 3:

Classification of hysteresis loops.

The Type H1 loop is found in materials which exhibit a narrow range of uniform mesopores, as for instance in templated silicas (e.g., MCM-41, MCM-48, SBA-15), some controlled pore glasses and ordered, mesoporous carbons. Usually, network effects are minimal and the steep, narrow loop is a clear sign of delayed condensation on the adsorption branch. However, Type H1 hysteresis has also been found in networks of ink-bottle pores where the width of the neck size distribution is similar to the width of the pore/cavity size distribution (e.g., 3DOm carbons [6]).

Hysteresis loops of Type H2 are given by more complex pore structures in which network effects are important. The very steep desorption branch, which is a characteristic feature of H2(a) loops, can be attributed either to pore-blocking/percolation in a narrow range of pore necks or to cavitation-induced evaporation. H2(a) loops are for instance given by many silica gels, some porous glasses (e.g., vycor) as well as some ordered mesoporous materials (e.g., SBA-16 and KIT-5 silicas). The Type H2(b) loop is also associated with pore blocking, but the size distribution of neck widths is now much larger. Examples of this type of hysteresis loops have been observed with mesocellular silica foams and certain mesoporous ordered silicas after hydrothermal treatment.

There are two distinctive features of the Type H3 loop: (i) the adsorption branch resembles a Type II isotherm (ii) the lower limit of the desorption branch is normally located at the cavitation-induced p/p0. Loops of this type are given by non-rigid aggregates of plate-like particles (e.g., certain clays) but also if the pore network consists of macropores which are not completely filled with pore condensate.

The H4 loop is somewhat similar, but the adsorption branch is now a composite of Types I and II, the more pronounced uptake at low p/p0 being associated with the filling of micropores. H4 loops are often found with aggregated crystals of zeolites, some mesoporous zeolites, and micro-mesoporous carbons.

Although the Type H5 loop is unusual, it has a distinctive form associated with certain pore structures containing both open and partially blocked mesopores (e.g., plugged hexagonal templated silicas).

As already indicated, the common feature of H3, H4 and H5 loops is the sharp step-down of the desorption branch. Generally, this is located in a narrow range of p/p0 for the particular adsorptive and temperature (e.g., at p/p0 ∼ 0.4 – 0.5 for nitrogen at temperatures of 77 K).

5 Assessment of surface area

5.1 Principles of the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) method

5.1.1 The basic equation

The Brunauer–Emmett–Teller method [2, 4] continues to be the most widely used procedure for evaluating the surface area of porous and finely-divided materials, in spite of the weakness of its theoretical foundations. Indeed, under certain carefully controlled conditions, the BET-area of a nonporous, macroporous or a mesoporous solid (i.e., giving a well-defined Type II or a Type IV(a) isotherm) can be regarded as the ‘probe accessible area’ (i.e., the effective area available for the adsorption of the specified adsorptive).

Two stages are involved in the application of the BET method. First, it is necessary to transform a physisorption isotherm into the ‘BET plot’ and from it derive a value of the BET monolayer capacity, nm. In the second stage, the BET-area, a(BET), is calculated from nm by adopting an appropriate value of the molecular cross-sectional area, σ.

It is customary to apply the BET equation in the linear form

p/pn(1p/p)=1nmC+C1nmC(p/p) (4)(4)

where n is the specific amount adsorbed at the relative pressure p/p° and nm is the specific monolayer capacity.

According to the BET theory, the parameter C is exponentially related to the energy of monolayer adsorption. It is now generally agreed that the value of C rather gives a useful indication of the shape of the isotherm in the BET range. Thus, if the value of C is at least ∼ 80 the knee of the isotherm is sharp and Point B is fairly well defined (see Fig. 2). It was this characteristic point which was first identified by Brunauer and Emmett as the stage of monolayer completion and the beginning of multilayer adsorption. If C is low (< ∼ 50) Point B cannot be identified as a single point on the isotherm. There is then an appreciable overlap of monolayer and multilayer adsorption and the precise interpretation of nm is questionable. When C < 2, the isotherm is either Type III or Type V (see section V) and the BET method is not applicable. A high value of C (say, > ∼ 150) is generally associated with either adsorption on high-energy surface sites or the filling of narrow micropores.

5.1.2 The derivation of nm and as (BET)

A convenient way to derive nm from the BET equation is to make use of the linear relation between (p/p°)/n (1–p/p°) and p/p° (i.e., ‘the BET plot’). The range of linearity of the BET plot is always restricted to a limited part of the isotherm, often within the p/p° range of ∼ 0.05–0.30 for Type II and Type IVa isotherms. However, in the case of Type IVb isotherms, caution is required since pore condensation may occur at quite low p/p0. The linear BET range is shifted to lower relative pressures when the adsorption energy is high, especially if the surface is energetically homogeneous or crystalline (e.g., for the adsorption of nitrogen or argon on graphitised carbon or xenon on clean metal films).

A procedure which allows one to determine the linear BET range in an unambiguous way is described in Section 5.2.2, which is particularly useful if micropores are present, when the linear BET range is also located at lower relative pressures.

The second stage in the application of the BET method is the calculation of the BET-area from the monolayer capacity. This requires a knowledge of the average area, σm (molecular cross-sectional area), occupied by the adsorbate molecule in the complete monolayer. Thus

as(BET)=nmLσm/m (5)(5)

where as (BET) is the BET specific area of the adsorbent (of mass m).

5.2 Standardisation of the BET method

The calculated value of the BET area is dependent on (i) the adsorptive and operational temperature and (ii) the procedure used to locate the pressure range in applying the BET equation.

5.2.1 Choice of the adsorptive for BET area determination

Nitrogen (at its boiling temperature, 77 K) was traditionally the adsorptive generally used to obtain a(BET), with σm(N2) assumed to be 0.162 nm2 (based on the assumption of a closed-packed monolayer). This is partly due to the fact that liquid nitrogen was readily available and also because nitrogen isotherms on many adsorbents were found to exhibit a well-defined Point B. However, it is now recognised that due to its quadrupole moment, the orientation of a nitrogen molecule is dependent on the surface chemistry of the adsorbent. This may lead to uncertainty in the value of σm(N2) – possibly ∼ 20% for some surfaces [2].

Argon may seem to be an alternative adsorptive for surface area determination. Argon does not have a quadrupole moment and is less reactive than the diatomic nitrogen molecule. There are, however, several reasons why argon at 77 K is considered to be less reliable than nitrogen. At 77 K, argon is ca. 6.5 K below the bulk triple point temperature and hence the bulk reference state is in doubt. Furthermore, there is evidence that at 77 K, the structure of the argon monolayer is highly dependent on the surface chemistry of the adsorbent (e.g., giving rise to Type VI isotherms on highly uniform surfaces such as graphitised carbons).

An alternative is argon adsorption at 87 K, i.e., at liquid argon temperature. Here, the problems encountered with argon at 77 K are not present. At 87 K, a cross-sectional area, σm(Ar), of 0.142 nm2 is usually assumed. Because of the absence of a quadrupole moment and the higher temperature, σm(Ar) is less sensitive to differences in the structure of the adsorbent surface [2]. Furthermore, argon adsorption at 87 K offers advantages in particular for micropore analysis (see Section 6). Measurements at 87 K can be performed by using either liquid argon (instead of liquid nitrogen) or a cryostat (or cryocooler).

By using highly accurate manometric adsorption equipment, it is possible to assess surface areas as low as (∼ 0.5–1) m2 with nitrogen or argon as the adsorptive. In order to evaluate even lower surface areas, krypton adsorption at 77 K is generally the recommended adsorptive [4]. However, the behaviour of the krypton at 77 K is in some respect comparable to that of argon at 77 K: at this temperature krypton is well below (by ca. 38 K) its triple point and sublimates at ca. 0.22 kPa. The standard thermodynamic state of the adsorbed layer is therefore not well defined. For the BET analysis one usually assumes that the condensed adsorbate corresponds to a supercooled liquid (p° = 0.35 kPa). Due to the extremely low saturation pressure, the number of molecules in the free space of the sample cell is significantly reduced (to 1/300th) as compared to nitrogen or argon at their respective boiling temperatures: this leads to the high sensitivity of krypton adsorption at 77 K. However, evaluation of surface area is complicated by the difficulty in choosing the value of the cross-sectional area σ(Kr), which appears to vary from solid to solid (commonly used values for σ(Kr) range from ∼ 0.17 to 0.23 nm2). Since no generally valid recommendations can be made, it is essential to state the chosen values of p° and σm(Kr). In spite of that, krypton adsorption at 77 K is considered to be a very useful tool for routine work on materials with low-surface area.

5.2.2 Application of the BET method to microporous materials

As mentioned in Section 5.1, the BET method can be applied to many Type II and Type IV isotherms, but extreme caution is needed in the presence of micropores (i.e., with Type I isotherms and combinations of Types I and II or Types I and IV isotherms). It may be impossible to separate the processes of monolayer-multilayer adsorption and micropore filling. With microporous adsorbents, the linear range of the BET plot may be very difficult to locate. A useful procedure [9] allows one to overcome this difficulty and avoid any subjectivity in evaluating the BET monolayer capacity. This procedure is based on the following main criteria:

  1. the quantity C should be positive (i.e., a negative intercept on the ordinate of the BET plot is the first indication that one is outside the appropriate range);

  2. application of the BET equation should be restricted to the range where the term n(1 – p/p0) continuously increases with p/p0;

  3. the p/p0 value corresponding to nm should be within the selected BET range.

It must be re-emphasised that this procedure should not be expected to confirm the validity of the BET monolayer capacity. Thus, the BET-area derived from a Type I isotherm must not be treated as a realistic probe accessible surface area. It represents an apparent surface area, which may be regarded as a useful adsorbent “fingerprint”.

6 Assessment of microporosity

6.1 Choice of adsorptive

Physisorption filling of micropores always occurs at low relative pressures. The range of low pressure is dependent on the shape and dimensions of the micropores, the size of the adsorptive molecules and their interactions with the adsorbent and with each other. Adsorption in narrow micropores (i.e., the “ultramicropores” of width no more than two or three molecular diameters depending on pore geometry) involves some overlap of the adsorption forces and takes place at very low relative pressures. This process has been termed ‘primary micropore filling’, whereas wider micropores are filled by a secondary process over a wider range of higher relative pressure (e.g., p/p0 ≈ 0.01–0.15 for argon and nitrogen adsorption at 87 K and 77 K). Enhancement of the adsorbent-adsorbate interaction energy is now reduced and cooperative adsorbate–adsorbate interactions in the confined space become more important for the micropore filling process.

For many years, nitrogen adsorption at 77 K has been generally accepted as the standard method for both micropore and mesopore size analysis, but for several reasons it is now becoming evident that nitrogen is not an entirely satisfactory adsorptive for assessing the micropore size distribution. It is well known that the quadrupolar nature of the nitrogen molecule is largely responsible for the specific interaction with a variety of surface functional groups and exposed ions. This not only affects the orientation of the adsorbed nitrogen molecule on the adsorbent surface (as mentioned in Section 5.2.1), but it also strongly affects the micropore filling pressure. For example, with many zeolites and MOFs the initial stage of physisorption is shifted to extremely low relative pressures (to ∼ 10–7). The rate of diffusion is slow in this ultra-low pressure range, which makes it difficult to measure equilibrated adsorption isotherms. Additional problems are associated with pre-adsorbed N2 molecules, which can block the entrances of narrow micropores, and specific interactions with surface functional groups so that the pore filling pressure is not clearly correlated with the pore size/structure. It follows that in order to measure an adsorption isotherm accurately careful consideration should be given to the choice of the adsorptive and the operational temperature.

In contrast to nitrogen, argon does not exhibit specific interactions with surface functional groups. However, as already indicated (Section 5.2.1), the interpretation of argon isotherms at liquid nitrogen temperature is not straightforward. At 87 K, this problem is avoided since argon fills narrow micropores at significantly higher relative pressures in comparison with nitrogen at 77 K [2, 4, 6]. This leads to accelerated equilibration and permits the measurement of high resolution adsorption isotherms. Hence, argon adsorption at 87 K allows a much more straightforward correlation to be obtained between the pore filling pressure and the confinement effect (depending on pore width and shape). This is particularly important for zeolitic materials, metal organic frameworks (MOFs) and some oxides and activated carbons [6].

Because of kinetic restrictions at cryogenic temperatures (87 K, 77 K) argon and nitrogen adsorption is of limited value for the characterisation of very narrow micropores. One way of addressing this problem is to use CO2 (kinetic dimension 0.33 nm) as the adsorptive at 273 K. At 273 K, the saturation vapour pressure of CO2. is very high (∼ 3.5 MPa) and hence the pressures required for micropore size analysis are in the moderate range (∼ 0.1 to–100) kPa. Because of these relatively high temperatures and pressures, diffusion is much faster and pores as small as 0.4 nm can be accessed. On the other hand, the easily measurable maximum relative pressure for measurements with CO2 at 273 K is p/p0 3 × 10–2 (corresponding to ambient pressure) and hence only pores < 1 nm can be explored.

Adsorption of CO2 at 273 K has become an accepted method for studying carbonaceous materials with very narrow micropores and has been described in various textbooks and reviews [2, 4, 6]. However, CO2 cannot be recommended for the pore size analysis of microporous solids with polar surface groups (e.g., oxides, zeolites, MOFs) since the quadrupole moment of CO2 is even larger than that of N2 which makes it difficult to correlate the CO2 pore filling pressure with the pore size.

6.2 Micropore volume

If the physisorption isotherm is of Type I (see Fig.2), with a virtually horizontal plateau, the limiting uptake may be taken as a simple measure of the micropore capacity, np, with respect to the adsorption of the particular gas at the operational temperature. To convert np into the micropore volume VP, it is usually assumed that the pores are filled with the condensed adsorptive in the normal liquid state. This assumption is known as the Gurvich rule [2, 4]. However, in practice, the plateau of the adsorption isotherm is rarely horizontal since most microporous adsorbents have appreciable external surface areas and many also have pores in the mesopore range. It follows that the Gurvich rule cannot always be applied in a straightforward way to determine the micropore volume.

A number of different methods have been proposed for the analysis of physisorption isotherms given by microporous solids. They can be divided into the older macroscopic procedures and those based on statistical mechanics (e.g., molecular simulation or density functional theory).

For routine analysis, the micropore volume is often assessed by application of a macroscopic procedure [2, 4]. One such approach involves the empirical comparison of an isotherm with an appropriate standard obtained on a non-porous reference material of similar chemical composition. In the t-method it is necessary to make use of a standard multilayer thickness curve, but this is dependent on the application of the BET method, which may not be strictly applicable (see Section 5). In order to overcome this problem the use of the αs-plot method is preferred because it does not need the evaluation of monolayer capacity and is also more adaptable than the t-plot. In this method the standard isotherm is plotted in a reduced form (n/nx)s versus the relative pressure p/p0, where the normalising factor nx is taken as the amount adsorbed at a preselected relative pressure (generally p/p0 = 0.4). In order to construct the αs-plot for a given adsorbent, the amount adsorbed n is plotted as a function of the reduced standard isotherm, αs = (n/nx)s. The micropore capacity is obtained by back extrapolation of a linear section of the αs plot. A refinement of the αs analysis makes use of high-resolution standard isotherm data at very low relative pressures [2, 4].

Another popular method for evaluation of the micropore volume is based on Dubinin’s pore-volume-filling theory. In accordance with the Dubinin–Radushkevich (DR) equation, a plot of log n versus log2(p0/p) is linear provided the micropore size has a uniform Gaussian distribution and its extrapolation to the ordinate will give the micropore capacity. Although linear DR plots have been reported for the physisorption of various gases and vapours by microporous carbons, there are numerous examples of the linear region being apparently absent or restricted to a limited range of low relative pressures. The applicability of the DR method is then questionable [2, 4].

It must be kept in mind that these classical methods do not allow for the effect of micropore size and shape on molecular packing so that the adsorbate cannot always have bulk-liquid like properties. This problem has been addressed in methods based on molecular simulation (MC) and density functional theory (DFT), which are discussed in the next section.

6.3 Micropore size analysis

An empirical way of studying microporosity is by the application of a number of molecular probes of progressively increasing molecular diameter. The method is based on the measurement of both adsorption rates and capacities. A sharp adsorption cutoff might be expected to correspond to a given micropore size, but this does not take account of the complexity of most microporous materials. Although the results are often quite difficult to interpret, generally it is possible to obtain useful information about the effective range of window and/or pore entrance size.

Various semi-empirical methods include those proposed by Horvath and Kawazoe (the HK method), Saito and Foley and Cheng and Yang for the evaluation of the pore size distribution of slit, cylindrical and spherical pores, respectively [2, 4, 6]. Although these semi-empirical methods tend to underestimate the pore size, they may be in some cases useful for the comparison of microporous materials. Microscopic treatments such as density functional theory (DFT) and molecular simulation, which can describe the configuration of the adsorbed phase at the molecular level, are considered to be superior and to provide a more reliable approach to pore size analysis over the complete nanopore range [6, 8].

Thus, DFT and Monte Carlo simulation (MC) have been developed into powerful methods for the description of the adsorption and phase behaviour of fluids confined in well-defined pore structures [7, 8]. These procedures are based on the fundamental principles of statistical mechanics as applied to the molecular behaviour of confined fluids. They describe the distribution of adsorbed molecules in pores on a molecular level and thus provide detailed information about the local fluid structure near the adsorbent surface. The fluid–solid interaction potential is dependent on the pore model. Different pore shape models (e.g., slit, cylinder and spherical geometries and hybrid shapes) have been developed for various material classes such as carbons, silicas, zeolites.

Non-local-density functional theory (NLDFT) based methods for pore size/volume analysis of nanoporous materials are now available for many adsorption systems [4, 6, 8]. They are included in commercial software and are also featured in international standards (such as ISO 15901-3).

These methods allow one to calculate for a particular adsorptive/adsorbent pair a series of theoretical isotherms, N(p/p0,W), in pores of different widths for a given pore shape. The series of theoretical isotherms is called the kernel, which can be regarded as a theoretical reference for a given class of adsorbent/adsorptive system. The calculation of the pore size distribution function f(W) is based on a solution of the general adsorption isotherm (GAI) equation, which correlates the experimental adsorption isotherm N(p/p0) with the kernel of the theoretical adsorption or desorption isotherms N(p/p0,W). For this purpose, the GAI equation is expressed in the form:

N(p/po)=WminWmaxN(p/po,W)f(W)dW (6)(6)

Although the solution of the GAI equation with respect to the pore size distribution function f(W) is strictly an ill-posed numerical problem, it is now generally accepted that meaningful and stable solutions can be obtained by using regularisation algorithms [8].

Several approaches have been suggested to account for the heterogeneity of most adsorbents, which if not properly taken into account can lead to appreciable inaccuracy in the pore size analysis. Such methods include the development of complex 3D structural models of disordered porous solids by advanced molecular simulation techniques, but these are still too complex to be implemented for routine pore size analysis. The drawbacks of the conventional NLDFT model which assumes a smooth and homogenous carbon surface have been addressed by the introduction of two-dimensional DFT approaches [10]. Quenched solid density functional theory (QSDFT) is another approach to quantitatively allow for the effects of surface heterogeneity in a practical way [6, 8]. It has been demonstrated that taking into account surface heterogeneity significantly improves the reliability of the pore size analysis of heterogenous nanoporous carbons.

Finally, it must be stressed that the application of advanced methods based on DFT and molecular simulation can lead to reasonably accurate evaluation of the pore size distribution only if a given nanoporous system is compatible with the chosen DFT/MC kernel. If the chosen kernel is not consistent with the experimental adsorptive/adsorbent system, the derived pore size distribution may be significantly in error.

7 Assessment of mesoporosity

7.1 Pore volume

If a mesoporous adsorbent contains no macropores, its Type IV isotherm remains nearly horizontal over the upper range of p/p0. The pore volume, Vp, is then derived from the amount of vapour adsorbed at a relative pressure close to unity (e.g., p/p0 = 0.95), by assuming that the pores are filled with the adsorbate in the bulk liquid state, (i.e., by applying the Gurvich rule) [2, 4].

If macropores are present, the isotherm is no longer nearly horizontal near p/p0 = 1 and the total pore volume cannot be evaluated from such a composite Type IV +Type II isotherm.

7.2 Mesopore size analysis

For many years mesopore size analysis was firmly based on the application of the Kelvin equation. Thus, the shift of the gas-liquid phase transition of a confined fluid from bulk coexistence, is expressed in terms of the surface tension γ of the bulk fluid and the molar liquid volume Vm . For cylindrical pores the modified Kelvin equation [2, 4] is:

ln(p/p0)=2γVm/RT(rptc) (7)(7)

where rp is the pore radius and tc the thickness of the adsorbed multilayer film, which is formed prior to pore condensation.

The many methods for mesopore size analysis, which make use of the modified Kelvin equation, include those proposed by Barrett, Joyner and Halenda (BJH) and Broeckhoff and de Boer [2, 4]. In order to account for the preadsorbed multilayer film, the Kelvin equation is combined with a standard isotherm (the t-curve), which is determined on certain well-defined nonporous solids. However, for the size analysis of narrow mesopores, the standard t-curve is not entirely satisfactory, because the curvature and enhanced surface forces are not properly taken into account. Similarly, the validity of the Kelvin equation is questionable as the mesopore width is reduced because macroscopic concepts can no longer be safely applied. This was clearly demonstrated with the aid of model mesoporous molecular sieves (e.g., M41S materials). Because of their high degree of order, the pore diameter of such model substances can be derived by independent methods (X-ray-diffraction, high-resolution transmission electron microscopy, etc.). It was shown [4, 6, 8] that the Kelvin equation based procedures, such as the BJH method, significantly underestimate the pore size for narrow mesopores (for pore diameter < ∼ 10 nm the pore size will be underestimated by ∼ 20–30 %).

The limitations of the Kelvin equation can be avoided by applying microscopic methods based on molecular simulation or DFT (e.g., NLDFT) which as discussed in detail in Section 6 yield the thermodynamics and density profiles of confined fluids and a description of the adsorbed phase on a molecular level. They capture the essential features of both micropore and mesopore filling and hysteresis [7, 8]. As a consequence they allow one to obtain a more reliable assessment of the pore size distribution over the complete range [6, 8]. Furthermore, one can obtain useful information from both the adsorption and desorption branches of the hysteresis loop. With certain ordered mesoporous materials, these methods are capable of quantitatively predicting the pore condensation and hysteresis behaviour by taking into account the underlying adsorption-desorption mechanisms including the delay in condensation due to metastability of the pore fluid [6, 8]. These advantages are crucial in the pore size analysis of materials which give rise to H2, H3, H4 and H5 hysteresis loops.

As indicated in Section 6, commercial DFT software is now available for various adsorbent systems and pore geometries (cylindrical, slit, spherical or hybrids). However, as already discussed, it is important to ensure that the chosen DFT and molecular simulation based methods are compatible with the experimental nanoporous system.

8 Aspects of gas adsorption in non-rigid materials

Physisorption isotherms are generally expected to be completely reversible in the monolayer, or micropore filling, range. In fact, for certain microporous systems (e.g., clays, coal, some activated carbons) low pressure hysteresis (LPH) may extend to the lowest attainable pressures [2]. Since such phenomena are sometimes difficult to reproduce, it might appear that low pressure hysteresis is an artefact simply due to faulty experimental technique. Of course, spurious data are obtained if insufficient time is allowed for the system to attain equilibrium. Another source of error is the presence of impurities either in the gas phase or on the surface. These complications must be avoided or removed before the evidence for reproducible and genuine LPH can be accepted. Genuine low pressure hysteresis is often associated with the expansion and contraction of adsorbents: the irreversible entry of the adsorbate molecules into pores of molecular dimensions can produce inelastic distortion of the adsorbent structure. A related effect, which has been termed “activated entry”, is the very slow diffusion of molecules through narrow pore entrances [2].

Adsorption may also induce structural transformations of the adsorbent that affect the adsorption isotherm to a great extent. Well known are structural transformations in zeolites, like MFI ZSM-5, which are reflected in the appearance of low-pressure hysteresis loops below the range of pressures associated with capillary condensation. Structural transformations are observed in some metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) and their sorption behaviour is not easy to interpret [11, 12]. Application of standard methods for the assessment of surface area and pore size analysis may lead to meaningless BET surface areas and pore size distributions. Novel theoretical approaches based on realistic pore models, which allow one to take into account the non-rigid nature of the adsorbent into account, are needed. Some progress has been made during the last few years [12] but this area requires major attention in the future.

In addition to these irreversible changes, elastic deformation of the adsorbent commonly occurs in various systems, such as charcoal, activated carbon, porous glass, zeolites and silica gels. Elastic deformation is usually quite small (between ∼ 0.1% and 1%); it does not affect significantly the sorption isotherm except for some polymers, aerogels and other materials of high porosity.

9 Conclusions and recommendations

Major advances in adsorption science over the past 30 years include: (i) Preparation of nanoporous materials with uniform pore structures, which are now used as model adsorbents; (ii) Introduction of high resolution adsorption techniques and reliable commercial instrumentation; and (iii) Application of density functional theory (DFT) and molecular simulation.

The original IUPAC classifications of physisorption isotherms and hysteresis loops have been extended and refined to include new characteristic types, which are associated with certain well-defined adsorption systems.

Caution is required in applying the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) method for the assessment of surface area. Use of a recommended procedure (see Section 5.2.2) improves the reproducibility of the method, when micropores are present, but one then obtains an apparent surface area (i.e., “BET area”) which serves as a useful “fingerprint” of the adsorbent.

The choice of adsorptive is crucial in the characterisation of porous materials. Nitrogen at 77 K has been widely used, but the interpretation of the isotherm data is not always straightforward. For various reasons, argon adsorption at 87 K is considered to be more reliable and is now recommended – particularly for micropore size analysis.

It is now evident that pore size analysis of narrow mesopores cannot be reliably achieved by the application of procedures based on the Kelvin equation, such as the Barrett–Joyner–Halenda (BJH) method. This traditional approach may still be useful, however, for routine work (e.g., industrial process control).

Density functional theory (DFT) based computational procedures are included in commercially available software and provide a reasonably reliable assessment of the nanopore size distribution (i.e., for both mesopores and micropores), provided that the given nanopore structure is compatible with the chosen DFT kernel.

The characterisation of poorly ordered nanoporous and non-rigid adsorbents (e.g., certain MOFs) represents a major challenge. More work is also required on the development of new certified reference materials and improved procedures for routine data analysis.

10 Membership of sponsoring bodies

President: Roberto Marquardt; Vice President: Angela Wilson; Secretary: Assaf Friedler; Past President: Kaoru Yamanouchi; Titular Members: Kristin Bartik, Andrea Russell, Jürgen Stohner, Yun Hin Taufiq-Yap, Frank van Veggel; Associate Members: Kankan Bhattacharyya, Attila Császár, Joaquim Luís de Faria, Vadim Yu. Kukushkin, Álvaro Mombrú Rodríguez, Xin Sheng Zhao; National Representatives: Md. Abu bin Hasan Susan, Jiří Cejka, Horácio Corti, Supa Hannongbua, Sung-Jin Kim, Eduard Klein, Marc Koper, Michal Korenko, Kari Laasonen, James Mdoe, Vladislav Tomišić.

This manuscript (PAC-REP-14-11-17) was prepared in the framework of IUPAC project 2010-009-1-100.

References

  • [1]

    K. S. W. Sing, D. H. Everett, R. A. W. Haul, L. Moscou, R. A. Pieroti, J. Rouquerol, T. Siemieniewska. Pure Appl. Chem. 57, (1985).Google Scholar

  • [2]

    J. Rouquerol, F. Rouquerol, K. S. W. Sing, P. Llewellyn, G. Maurin. Adsorption by Powders and Porous Solids: Principles, Methodology and Applications, Academic Press (2014).Google Scholar

  • [3]

    E. R. Cohen, T. Cvitas, J. G. Frey, B. Holmström, K. Kuchitsu, R. Marquardt, I. Mills, F. Pavese, M. Quack, J. Stohner, H. L. Strauss, M. Takami, A. J. Thor. Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed., RSC Publishing, Cambridge, UK (2007).Google Scholar

  • [4]

    S. Lowell, J. Shields, M. A. Thomas, M. Thommes, Characterization of Porous Solids and Powders: Surface Area. Porosity and Density, Springer, 2004.Google Scholar

  • [5]

    J. Silvestre-Albero, A. M. Silvestre-Albero, P. L. Llewellyn, F. Rodriguez-Reinoso. J. Phys. Chem. C 117, 16885 (2013).Google Scholar

  • [6]

    M. Thommes, K. A. Cychosz. Adsorption 20, 233 (2014).Google Scholar

  • [7]

    P. A Monson. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 160, 47 (2012).Google Scholar

  • [8]

    J. Landers, G. Y. Gor, A. V Neimark. Colloid. Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 437, 3 (2013).Google Scholar

  • [9]

    J. Rouquerol, P. Llewellyn, F. Rouquerol. Stud. Surf. Sci. Catal. 160, 49 (2007).Google Scholar

  • [10]

    J. Jagiello, J. P. Olivier. J. Phys. Chem. C 113, 19382 (2009).Google Scholar

  • [11]

    K. Kaneko, T. Itoh, T. Fujimori. Chem Lett. 41, 466 (2012).Google Scholar

  • [12]

    A. V. Neimark, F. Coudert, A. Boutin, A. Fuchs. JPC Lett. 1, 445 (2010).Google Scholar

Note:

Republication or reproduction of this report or its storage and/or dissemination by electronic means is permitted without the need for formal IUPAC or De Gruyter permission on condition that an acknowledgment, with full reference to the source, along with use of the copyright symbol ©, the name IUPAC, the name De Gruyter, and the year of publication, are prominently visible. Publication of a translation into another language is subject to the additional condition of prior approval from the relevant IUPAC National Adhering Organisation and De Gruyter.

About the article

Corresponding author: Matthias Thommes, Applied Science Department, Quantachrome Instruments, 1900 Corporate Drive, Boynton Beach, FL, USA, e-mail:


Received: 2014-11-17

Accepted: 2015-04-30

Published Online: 2015-07-02

Published in Print: 2015-10-01


Citation Information: Pure and Applied Chemistry, Volume 87, Issue 9-10, Pages 1051–1069, ISSN (Online) 1365-3075, ISSN (Print) 0033-4545, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2014-1117.

Export Citation

©2015 IUPAC & De Gruyter. Copyright Clearance Center

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Yanming Jia, Junwen Wang, Kan Zhang, Guoliang Chen, Yufei Yang, Shibin Liu, Chuanmin Ding, Yuanyuan Meng, and Ping Liu
Powder Technology, 2018
[2]
Sheng Wang, Panyong Kuang, Bei Cheng, Jiaguo Yu, and Chuanjia Jiang
Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2018
[4]
Xiaofeng Ji, Dangyu Song, Xiaoming Ni, Yunbo Li, and Haotian Zhao
Energies, 2018, Volume 11, Number 1, Page 175
[5]
Nor Rahafza Abdul Manap, Roslinda Shamsudin, Mohd Norhafsam Maghpor, Muhammad Azmi Abdul Hamid, and Azman Jalar
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2018
[6]
Anna N. Matveyeva, Nadezhda A. Zaitseva, Päivi Mäki-Arvela, Atte Aho, Anastasia K. Bachina, Sergey P. Fedorov, Dmitry Yu. Murzin, and Nikolai A. Pakhomov
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2018
[7]
Gennady Y. Gor and Boris Gurevich
Geophysical Research Letters, 2018
[8]
Michael Feroldi, Carlos Eduardo Borba, Sidnei Dias Monteiro Júnior, and Helton José Alves
Matéria (Rio de Janeiro), 2018, Volume 22, Number suppl 1
[9]
Syedvali Pinjari, Madan Kumar Kumaravelan, Venkat Chalapathirao Peddy, Sriganesh Gandham, Jagannadharao Patruni, Sridevi Velluru, and Pramod Kumar
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2018
[10]
M. C. E. Pinto, R. M. M. Santos, R. G. L. Gonçalves, V. G. O. Duarte, P. D. Borges, F. Leroux, V. R. L. Constantino, C. M. S. Izumi, F. G. Pinto, and J. Tronto
Dalton Transactions, 2018
[11]
Ramin Yousefi, Javad Beheshtian, Seyedeh Mozhgan Seyed-Talebi, H. R. Azimi, and Farid Jamali-Sheini
Chemistry - An Asian Journal, 2018
[12]
[13]
Karen C. Bedin, André L. Cazetta, Isis P.A.F. Souza, Osvaldo Pezoti, Lucas S. Souza, Patrícia S.C. Souza, Jéssica T.C. Yokoyama, and Vitor C. Almeida
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2018
[14]
Kaixiang Zou, Yuanfu Deng, Juping Chen, Yunqian Qian, Yuewang Yang, Yingwei Li, and Guohua Chen
Journal of Power Sources, 2018, Volume 378, Page 579
[16]
Si Luo, Thuy-Duong Nguyen-Phan, Dimitriy Vovchok, Iradwikanari Waluyo, Robert M. Palomino, Andrew D. Gamalski, Laura Barrio, Wenqian Xu, Dmitry E. Polyansky, José A. Rodriguez, and Sanjaya D. Senanayake
Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 2018
[18]
X. F. Zhang, B. Wang, J. Yu, X. N. Wu, Y. H. Zang, H. C. Gao, P. C. Su, and S. Q. Hao
RSC Advances, 2018, Volume 8, Number 3, Page 1159
[19]
Mingqiang Liu, Lishu Shao, Jianhan Huang, and You-Nian Liu
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2018
[20]
M. Poienar, R. Banica, P. Sfirloaga, C. Ianasi, C.V. Mihali, and P. Vlazan
Ceramics International, 2018
[21]
Christian Weinberger, Sai Ren, Marc Hartmann, Thorsten Wagner, Didem. Ş. Karaman, Jessica M. Rosenholm, and Michael Tiemann
ACS Applied Nano Materials, 2018
[22]
Rafael Alberto Fonseca-Correa, Marlon Jose Bastidas-Barranco, Liliana Giraldo, and Juan Carlos Moreno-Piraján
European Journal of Chemistry, 2017, Volume 8, Number 3, Page 279
[23]
Liliana Rosu, Cristian–Dragos Varganici, Andra–Manuela Crudu, Dan Rosu, and Adrian Bele
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017
[24]
Ishin Nishimura, Kazuma Gotoh, Towa Hiura, Hitomi Kawamura, Hideki Hashimoto, Syuji Matsumoto, Jun Takada, Takatoshi Kasukabe, Hirotomo Nishihara, Hidenori Goto, Takahiro Ohkubo, and Hiroyuki Ishida
TANSO, 2017, Volume 2017, Number 280, Page 188
[25]
[26]
Anderson B. Leite, Caroline Saucier, Eder C. Lima, Glaydson S. dos Reis, Cibele S. Umpierres, Beatris L. Mello, Mohammad Shirmardi, Silvio L.P Dias, and Carlos H. Sampaio
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017
[27]
Alexander F. R. Kilpatrick, Nicholas H. Rees, Saovalak Sripothongnak, Jean-Charles Buffet, and Dermot O’Hare
Organometallics, 2017
[28]
Dimitrios A. Giannakoudakis, Marc Florent, Rajiv Wallace, Jeff Secor, Christopher Karwacki, and Teresa J. Bandosz
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017
[29]
Yong-Hua Zhao, Chang Liu, Yong-Hong Song, Qi-Jian Zhang, Min-Li Zhu, Zhao-Tie Liu, and Zhong-Wen Liu
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2017
[30]
S. Hadi Madani, Ian Harvey Arellano, Jitendra P. Mata, and Phillip Pendleton
Powder Technology, 2017
[31]
Paola Rodríguez-Estupiñán, Alessandro Erto, Liliana Giraldo, and Juan Moreno-Piraján
Molecules, 2017, Volume 22, Number 12, Page 2280
[33]
Lydia Köhler, Susanne Machill, Anja Werner, Carolin Selzer, Stefan Kaskel, and Eike Brunner
Molecules, 2017, Volume 22, Number 12, Page 2232
[34]
Naoki Toyama, Ryota Ogawa, Haruki Inoue, Shinobu Ohki, Masataka Tansho, Tadashi Shimizu, Tetsuo Umegaki, and Yoshiyuki Kojima
Journal of Advanced Ceramics, 2017, Volume 6, Number 4, Page 368
[35]
Jonatan R. Restrepo-Garcia, Gustavo E. Ramírez, and Víctor G. Baldovino-Medrano
Catalysis Letters, 2017
[36]
Sauvik Chatterjee, Piyali Bhanja, Luna Paul, Mahammad Ali, and Asim Bhaumik
Dalton Transactions, 2018
[37]
Timo Rhauderwiek, Konrad Wolkersdörfer, Sigurd Øien-Ødegaard, Karl-Petter Lillerud, Michael Wark, and Norbert Stock
Chemical Communications, 2018
[38]
Yanyan Wang, Meiyao Tang, He Shen, Guangbo Che, Yu Qiao, and Bo Liu
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2017
[39]
Abdelhakim Elmouwahidi, Jesica Castelo-Quibén, Jose F. Vivo-Vilches, Agustín F. Pérez-Cadenas, Francisco J. Maldonado-Hódar, and Francisco Carrasco-Marín
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2018, Volume 334, Page 1835
[40]
A. Elmouwahidi, E. Bailón-García, J. Castelo-Quibén, A. F. Pérez-Cadenas, F. J. Maldonado-Hódar, and F. Carrasco-Marín
Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 2018
[41]
Daniel Torres, Pedro Arcelus-Arrillaga, Marcos Millan, José Pinilla, and Isabel Suelves
Nanomaterials, 2017, Volume 7, Number 12, Page 447
[42]
Lucjan Chmielarz, Andrzej Kowalczyk, Monika Skoczek, Małgorzata Rutkowska, Barbara Gil, Piotr Natkański, Marcelina Radko, Monika Motak, Radosław Dębek, and Janusz Ryczkowski
Applied Clay Science, 2017
[43]
M.O. Loeh, F. Badaczewski, M. von der Lehr, R. Ellinghaus, S. Dobrotka, J. Metz, and B.M. Smarsly
Carbon, 2017
[44]
Luís Mafra, Tomaž Čendak, Sarah Schneider, Paul V. Wiper, João Pires, José R.B. Gomes, and Moisés L. Pinto
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017
[45]
Emmanuelle Pons, Bernard Yrieix, and Samuel Brunner
Energy and Buildings, 2017
[46]
Daniel W. Siderius, William P. Krekelberg, Wei-Shan Chiang, Vincent K. Shen, and Yun Liu
Langmuir, 2017
[47]
Nurul Chotimah, Austina D. Putri, Yuji Ono, Sagisaka Kento, Yoshiyuki Hattori, Shuwen Wang, Ryusuke Futamura, Koki Urita, Fernando Vallejos-Burgos, Isamu Moriguchi, Masafumi Morimoto, Richard T. Cimino, Alexander V. Neimark, Toshio Sakai, and Katsumi Kaneko
Langmuir, 2017
[48]
Runyu Yan, Tobias Heil, Volker Presser, Ralf Walczak, Markus Antonietti, and Martin Oschatz
Advanced Sustainable Systems, 2017, Page 1700128
[50]
Mohamad Azuwa Mohamed, Juhana Jaafar, M.F.M. Zain, Lorna Jeffery Minggu, Mohammad B. Kassim, Mohamad Saufi Rosmi, Nur Hashimah Alias, Nor Azureen Mohamad Nor, W.N.W. Salleh, and Mohd Hafiz Dzarfan Othman
Applied Surface Science, 2017
[51]
Fei Wang, Feng Ren, Dan Ma, Peng Mu, Huijuan Wei, Chaohu Xiao, Zhaoqi Zhu, Hanxue Sun, Weidong Liang, Jixiang Chen, Lihua Chen, and An Li
Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 2018
[52]
Zong-Wen Mo, Hao-Long Zhou, Dong-Dong Zhou, Rui-Biao Lin, Pei-Qin Liao, Chun-Ting He, Wei-Xiong Zhang, Xiao-Ming Chen, and Jie-Peng Zhang
Advanced Materials, 2017, Page 1704350
[53]
Sunny K. S. Freitas, Raquel S. Borges, Claudia Merlini, Guilherme M. O. Barra, and Pierre M. Esteves
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017, Volume 121, Number 48, Page 27247
[55]
Wang Yang, Wu Yang, Lina Kong, Ailing Song, and Xiujuan Qin
RSC Advances, 2017, Volume 7, Number 87, Page 55257
[56]
Roman Morozov, Igor Krivtsov, Viacheslav Avdin, Zakariae Amghouz, Alexander Gorshkov, Ekaterina Pushkova, Oleg Bol'shakov, Aleksandra Bulanova, and Marina Ilkaeva
Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, 2017
[57]
Yajuan Li, Shuanghao Zheng, Xue Liu, Pan Li, Lei Sun, Ruixia Yang, Sen Wang, Zhong-Shuai Wu, Xinhe Bao, and Wei-Qiao Deng
Angewandte Chemie, 2017
[58]
Xueting Wang, Adam A. Arvidsson, Magdalena O. Cichocka, Xiaodong Zou, Natalia M. Martin, Johan Nilsson, Stefan Carlson, Johan Gustafson, Magnus Skoglundh, Anders Hellman, and Per-Anders Carlsson
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017
[60]
Leilei Si, Zenghua Li, Yongliang Yang, Li Xin, Zhen Liu, Yanan Liu, and Xiaoyan Zhang
Energy & Fuels, 2017
[61]
Antonio Narcisio Pinheiro, Regina Claudia Rodrigues dos Santos, Sarah Brenda Ferreira dos Santos, Moacir José da Silva Júnior, Tiago Pinheiro Braga, Valder Nogueira Freire, and Antoninho Valentini
Catalysis Science & Technology, 2018
[62]
Yajuan Li, Shuanghao Zheng, Xue Liu, Pan Li, Lei Sun, Ruixia Yang, Sen Wang, Zhong-Shuai Wu, Xinhe Bao, and Wei-Qiao Deng
Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 2017
[63]
Ai-Dong Tan, Kai Wan, Yi-Fang Wang, Zhi-Yong Fu, and Zhen-Xing Liang
Catalysis Science & Technology, 2018
[64]
Qing Liu, Shengjia Wang, Guoming Zhao, Hongyuan Yang, Meng Yuan, Xiaoxi An, Haifeng Zhou, Yingyun Qiao, and Yuanyu Tian
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017
[65]
William P. Krekelberg, Daniel W. Siderius, Vincent K. Shen, Thomas M. Truskett, and Jeffrey R. Errington
Langmuir, 2017
[66]
Helir-Joseph Muñoz, Carolina Blanco, Antonio Gil, Miguel-Ángel Vicente, and Luis-Alejandro Galeano
Materials, 2017, Volume 10, Number 12, Page 1364
[67]
Il To Kim, Myeong Jun Song, Seoyoon Shin, and Moo Whan Shin
Applied Surface Science, 2017
[69]
Estelle Juère, Justyna Florek, Meryem Bouchoucha, Siddharth Jambhrunkar, Kuan Yau Wong, Amirali Popat, and Freddy Kleitz
Molecular Pharmaceutics, 2017
[70]
Ana María Carvajal Bernal, Fernando Augusto Gomez Granados, Liliana Giraldo Gutiérrez, and Juan Carlos Moreno Piraján
Revista Colombiana de Química, 2018, Volume 47, Number 1, Page 27
[71]
Aamer Khan, Patrizia Savi, Simone Quaranta, Massimo Rovere, Mauro Giorcelli, Alberto Tagliaferro, Carlo Rosso, and Charles Jia
Polymers, 2017, Volume 9, Number 12, Page 642
[72]
Maria Roca Jalil, Miria Baschini, and Karim Sapag
Materials, 2017, Volume 10, Number 12, Page 1345
[73]
Pablo J. Bereciartua, Ángel Cantín, Avelino Corma, José L. Jordá, Miguel Palomino, Fernando Rey, Susana Valencia, Edward W. Corcoran, Pavel Kortunov, Peter I. Ravikovitch, Allen Burton, Chris Yoon, Yu Wang, Charanjit Paur, Javier Guzman, Adeana R. Bishop, and Gary L. Casty
Science, 2017, Volume 358, Number 6366, Page 1068
[74]
Igor S. Gomes, Davi C. de Carvalho, Alcineia C. Oliveira, Enrique Rodriguez-Castellón, Samuel Tehuacanero-Cuapa, Paulo T.C. Freire, Josué M. Filho, Gilberto D. Saraiva, Francisco F. de Sousa, and Rossano Lang
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017
[75]
M. Alejandra Mazo, Javier Sanguino, Aitana Tamayo, and Juan Rubio
Journal of Nano Research, 2017, Volume 50, Page 1
[76]
Tian Zhao, Ling Yang, Peiyong Feng, Irina Gruber, Christoph Janiak, and Yuejun Liu
Inorganica Chimica Acta, 2017
[77]
Yonghong Zeng, Hui Xu, D.D. Do, and D. Nicholson
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2018, Volume 334, Page 1316
[78]
Tatsumasa Hiratsuka, Hideki Tanaka, and Minoru T. Miyahara
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017
[79]
Huong Giang T Nguyen, Jarod C Horn, Matthias Thommes, Roger D van Zee, and Laura Espinal
Measurement Science and Technology, 2017, Volume 28, Number 12, Page 125802
[80]
Lawrence A. Limjuco, Grace Masbate Nisola, Rey Eliseo Castillo Torrejos, Jeong Woo Han, Ho Seong Song, Khino J. Parohinog, Sangho Koo, Seong-Poong Lee, and Wook-Jin Chung
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017
[81]
[83]
Monika Bakierska, Agnieszka Chojnacka, Michał Świętosławski, Piotr Natkański, Marta Gajewska, Małgorzata Rutkowska, and Marcin Molenda
Materials, 2017, Volume 10, Number 12, Page 1336
[84]
Zhengxing Qin, Katie A. Cychosz, Georgian Melinte, Hussein El Siblani, Jean-Pierre Gilson, Matthias Thommes, Christian Fernandez, Svetlana Mintova, Ovidiu Ersen, and Valentin Valtchev
Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2017
[85]
Lucian Roiban, Siddardha Koneti, Franck Morfin, Thanh-Son Nguyen, Pascale Mascunan, Mimoun Aouine, Thierry Epicier, and Laurent Piccolo
ChemCatChem, 2017
[86]
Hua Chen, Yingqiu Zheng, Bei Cheng, Jiaguo Yu, and Chuanjia Jiang
Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2017
[87]
Bogna Napruszewska, Alicja Michalik-Zym, Melania Rogowska, Elżbieta Bielańska, Wojciech Rojek, Adam Gaweł, Monika Wójcik-Bania, Krzysztof Bahranowski, and Ewa Serwicka
Materials, 2017, Volume 10, Number 11, Page 1326
[88]
Oksana Dudarko and Yuriy Zub
Chemistry Journal of Moldova, 2017, Number Accepted paper
[89]
Paula M. Veiga, Alexandre C.L. Gomes, Cláudia de O. Veloso, and Cristiane A. Henriques
Molecular Catalysis, 2017
[90]
Christel Kutzscher, André Gelbert, Sebastian Ehrling, Claudia Schenk, Irena Senkovska, and Stefan Kaskel
Dalton Transactions, 2017
[91]
Ghada Nafie, Gerardo Vitale, Lante Carbognani Ortega, and Nashaat N. Nassar
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017
[92]
Lishu Shao, Mingqiang Liu, Jianhan Huang, and You-Nian Liu
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2017
[93]
Peng-Cheng Liu, Ye-Jun Yu, Bo Peng, Shi-Yu Ma, Tian-Yu Ning, Bing-Qian Shan, Tai-Qun Yang, Qing-Song Xue, Kun Zhang, and Peng Wu
Green Chemistry, 2017
[94]
Katja Schaldach, Volker Herdegen, Hans-Werner Schröder, and Jens-Uwe Repke
Chemie Ingenieur Technik, 2017
[95]
Zheng Yang, Geng Chen, Hanqin Weng, Wanglai Shen, Zhuyun Huang, and Mingzhang Lin
Journal of Materials Science, 2017
[96]
Meng Liu, Yunlei Zhang, Enwei Zhu, Pei Jin, Kai Wang, Jiaojiao Zhao, Chunxiang Li, and Yongsheng Yan
ChemistrySelect, 2017, Volume 2, Number 32, Page 10413
[97]
Lumeng Liu, Shiliang (Johnathan) Tan, Toshihide Horikawa, D.D. Do, D. Nicholson, and Junjie Liu
Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, 2017
[98]
Zimei Chen, Christian Weinberger, Michael Tiemann, and Dirk Kuckling
Processes, 2017, Volume 5, Number 4, Page 70
[99]
Barbara Szczęśniak, Jerzy Choma, and Mietek Jaroniec
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2018, Volume 261, Page 105
[100]
Ramakrishnan Kalai Selvan, Pei Zhu, Chaoi Yan, Jiadeng Zhu, Mahmut Dirican, A.Shanmugavani, Yun Sung Lee, and Xiangwu Zhang
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2017
[101]
Giovanni Golemme, Alfonso Policicchio, Eloisa Sardella, Giuseppina De Luca, Beatrice Russo, Paola F. Liguori, Alessandro Melicchio, and Raffaele G. Agostino
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2017
[102]
F.J. Delgado-Gómez, V. Calvino-Casilda, A. Cerpa-Naranjo, and M.L. Rojas-Cervantes
Molecular Catalysis, 2017, Volume 443, Page 101
[103]
Mohammed Ismael, Engy Elhaddad, Dereje Taffa, and Michael Wark
Catalysts, 2017, Volume 7, Number 11, Page 326
[104]
Carolin Selzer, Tim Biemelt, Anja Werner, and Stefan Kaskel
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[105]
Florian Schnetzer, Cliff T. Johnston, Gnanasiri S. Premachandra, Nicolas Giraudo, Rainer Schuhmann, Peter Thissen, and Katja Emmerich
ACS Earth and Space Chemistry, 2017
[107]
Yunyong Li, Ying Huang, Changzhi Ou, Junlu Zhu, Xingxing Yuan, Liang Yan, Wenwu Li, and Haiyan Zhang
Electrochimica Acta, 2017
[110]
Ana C. de M. Oliveira, Marluce S. dos Santos, Luma M. S. Brandão, Iraí Tadeu F. de Resende, Inmaculada M. Leo, Erika S. Morillo, Rufino M. N. Yerga, J.L.G. Fierro, Silvia M. da S. Egues, and Renan T. Figueiredo
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017
[111]
Anand Ramanathan, Hongda Zhu, Rajamanickam Maheswari, and Bala Subramaniam
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[112]
Tao Zeng, Hongyu Huang, Noriyuki Kobayashi, and Jun Li
Natural Resources, 2017, Volume 08, Number 10, Page 611
[113]
Ali İhsan Karayiğit, Maria Mastalerz, R. Görkem Oskay, Xavier Querol, and Nir Roy Lieberman
International Journal of Coal Geology, 2017
[114]
Bahman Abdollahi, Alireza Shakeri, Soheil Aber, and Mina Sharifi Bonab
Research on Chemical Intermediates, 2017
[115]
Yuta Yoshimoto, Takuma Hori, Ikuya Kinefuchi, and Shu Takagi
Physical Review E, 2017, Volume 96, Number 4
[116]
Shuai Tan, Matthew B. Gray, Michelle K. Kidder, Yongqiang Cheng, Luke L. Daemen, Dongkyu Lee, Ho Nyung Lee, Ying-Zhong Ma, Benjamin Doughty, and Daniel A. Lutterman
ACS Catalysis, 2017, Page 8118
[117]
Rémy Guillet-Nicolas, François Bérubé, Matthias Thommes, Michael T. Janicke, and Freddy Kleitz
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017
[118]
Xiaohuan Ji, Franziska Griesing, Ruijia Yan, Bin Sun, Werner Pauer, Meifang Zhu, Yushan Sun, and Hans-Ulrich Moritz
RSC Adv., 2017, Volume 7, Number 79, Page 50176
[119]
Yan Liu, Ying Dai, Dingzhong Yuan, Yun Wang, and Lixia Zou
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, 2017
[120]
Sandra M.L. Santos, Juan A. Cecilia, Enrique Vilarrasa-García, Cristina García-Sancho, Ivanildo J. Silva Junior, Enrique Rodríguez-Castellón, and Diana C.S. Azevedo
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[121]
E.S. Sanz-Pérez, A. Arencibia, G. Calleja, and R. Sanz
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[122]
Qingze Chen, Runliang Zhu, Haoyang Fu, Lingya Ma, Jianxi Zhu, Hongping He, and Youjun Deng
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[123]
Andrey Ryzhikov, T. Jean Daou, Habiba Nouali, Joel Patarin, Judith Ouwehand, Sander Clerick, Els De Canck, Pascal Van Der Voort, and Johan A. Martens
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[124]
Qiang Li, Libo Deng, Jang-Kyo Kim, Yanqiu Q. Zhu, Stuart M. Holmes, Maria Perez-Page, and Stephen J. Eichhorn
Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 2017, Volume 164, Number 13, Page A3220
[125]
Peter A. Beaucage, Ethan M. Susca, Sol M. Gruner, and Ulrich B. Wiesner
Chemistry of Materials, 2017
[126]
Andrey A. Gusev, Antonios C. Psarras, Konstantinos S. Triantafyllidis, Angelos A. Lappas, and Paul A. Diddams
Molecules, 2017, Volume 22, Number 10, Page 1784
[127]
Paloma Vinaches and Sibele B. C. Pergher
European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry, 2017
[128]
Stacey A. Saba, Bongjoon Lee, and Marc A. Hillmyer
ACS Macro Letters, 2017, Page 1232
[129]
Alauddin Ahmed, Yiyang Liu, Justin Purewal, Ly D. Tran, Antek G. Wong-Foy, Mike Veenstra, Adam J. Matzger, and Donald J. Siegel
Energy Environ. Sci., 2017
[130]
X. Zhao, G. C. Becker, N. Faweya, C. Rodriguez Correa, S. Yang, X. Xie, and A. Kruse
Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 2017
[131]
David P. Gamliel, Brian P. Baillie, Evan Augustine, Jason Hall, George M. Bollas, and Julia A. Valla
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[132]
Guillaume Fraux, François-Xavier Coudert, Anne Boutin, and Alain H. Fuchs
Chem. Soc. Rev., 2017
[133]
Leandro Marques Correia, Juan Antonio Cecilia, Francisco Murilo Tavares de Luna, Enrique Vilarrasa-García, Célio Loureiro Cavalcante, Enrique Rodríguez-Castellón, and Rodrigo Silveira Vieira
The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2017
[134]
Pascal Woodtli, Sandro Giger, Patrick Müller, Lucie Sägesser, Nicola Zucchetto, Michael J. Reber, Achim Ecker, and Dominik Brühwiler
Dyes and Pigments, 2017
[135]
Huayu Qian, Jing Tang, Md. Shahriar A. Hossain, Yoshio Bando, Xin Wang, and Yusuke Yamauchi
Nanoscale, 2017
[136]
Nagesh Kumar, Amit Kumar, Guan-Min Huang, Wen-Wei Wu, and Tseung Yuen Tseng
Applied Surface Science, 2017
[137]
David Stewart, Dmytro Antypov, Matthew S. Dyer, Michael J. Pitcher, Alexandros P. Katsoulidis, Philip A. Chater, Frédéric Blanc, and Matthew J. Rosseinsky
Nature Communications, 2017, Volume 8, Number 1
[139]
Jun-Yue Shen, Meng-Di Wang, Yan-Fang Wang, Jing-Ya Hu, Yanyan Zhu, Yu Xin Zhang, Zhong-Jun Li, and Hong-Chang Yao
Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2017
[140]
Yang Jiao, Yang Liu, Guanghui Zhu, Julian T. Hungerford, Souryadeep Bhattacharyya, Ryan P. Lively, David S. Sholl, and Krista S. Walton
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017
[141]
Fan Zeng, Stefan H. Bossmann, Michael G. Heidlage, and Keith L. Hohn
Chemical Engineering Science, 2017
[142]
[143]
R. Ojeda-López, G. Ramos-Sánchez, J.M. Esparza-Schulz, L. Lartundo, and A. Domínguez-Ortiz
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017
[144]
Sebastian Glomb, Dennis Woschko, Gamall Makhloufi, and Christoph Janiak
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017
[145]
Rui Yang, Qinhong Hu, Sheng He, Fang Hao, Xusheng Guo, Jizheng Yi, and Xipeng He
Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2017
[146]
Emílio Tchikuala, Paulo Mourão, and João Nabais
Procedia Engineering, 2017, Volume 200, Page 399
[148]
Luis A. Lozano, Clara M. Iglesias, Betina M.C. Faroldi, María A. Ulla, and Juan M. Zamaro
Journal of Materials Science, 2017
[149]
Taís L. Silva, André L. Cazetta, Patrícia S.C. Souza, Tao Zhang, Tewodros Asefa, and Vitor C. Almeida
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017
[151]
M. Borel, M. Dodin, T. J. Daou, N. Bats, and J. Patarin
New J. Chem., 2017
[152]
Liliana Giraldo and Juan Carlos Moreno-Piraján
Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 2017
[153]
Maria A. Zazycki, Marcelo Godinho, Daniele Perondi, Edson L. Foletto, Gabriela C. Collazzo, and Guilherme L. Dotto
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017
[154]
Chunwei Dong, Rui Ge, Dong Yao, Zhennan Wu, Zidong Wang, Yi Liu, Bai Yang, and Hao Zhang
CrystEngComm, 2017
[155]
Hangjia Shen, Eduardo Gracia-Espino, Jingyuan Ma, Ketao Zang, Jun Luo, Le Wang, Sanshuang Gao, Xamxikamar Mamat, Guangzhi Hu, Thomas Wagberg, and Shaojun Guo
Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 2017
[156]
Hangjia Shen, Eduardo Gracia-Espino, Jingyuan Ma, Ketao Zang, Jun Luo, Le Wang, Sanshuang Gao, Xamxikamar Mamat, Guangzhi Hu, Thomas Wagberg, and Shaojun Guo
Angewandte Chemie, 2017
[157]
Simon Fleischmann, Desirée Leistenschneider, Valeria Lemkova, Benjamin Krüner, Marco Zeiger, Lars Borchardt, and Volker Presser
Chemistry of Materials, 2017
[158]
Tongkun Zhao, Jiakui Zhang, Zheng Du, Yahua Liu, Guoli Zhou, and Jingtao Wang
Electrochimica Acta, 2017
[159]
Suvendu Sekhar Mondal, Maximilian Hovestadt, Subarna Dey, Carolin Paula, Sebastian Glomb, Alexandra Kelling, Uwe Schilde, Christoph Janiak, Martin Hartmann, and Hans-Jürgen Holdt
CrystEngComm, 2017
[160]
Evgeny Yu. Semitut, Taisiya S. Sukhikh, Evgeny Yu. Filatov, Galina A. Anosova, Alexey A. Ryadun, Konstantin A. Kovalenko, and Andrei S. Potapov
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017
[161]
Anja Werner, Paul Bludovsky, Carolin Selzer, Ulrike Koch, Lars Giebeler, Steffen Oswald, and Stefan Kaskel
ChemCatChem, 2017
[162]
Javier Cepeda, Garikoitz Beobide, Oscar Castillo, Antonio Luque, and Sonia Pérez-Yáñez
Coordination Chemistry Reviews, 2017, Volume 352, Page 83
[163]
Divya Puthusseri, Deepu J. Babu, Sherif Okeil, and Jörg J. Schneider
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2017
[164]
Şahika Sena Bayazit, Selen Tuğba Danalıoğlu, Mohamed Abdel Salam, and Özge Kerkez Kuyumcu
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017
[165]
Hanlin Wang, Haibo Liu, Jingjing Xie, Hongwei Li, Tianhu Chen, Peng Chen, and Dong Chen
Applied Clay Science, 2017, Volume 150, Page 63
[166]
A. V. Shkolin and A. A. Fomkin
Colloid Journal, 2017, Volume 79, Number 5, Page 701
[167]
Hassnain Abbas Khan, Prakash Natarajan, and Kwang-Deog Jung
Catalysis Today, 2017
[168]
Duangdao Channei, Auppatham Nakaruk, and Sukon Phanichphant
Journal of the Australian Ceramic Society, 2017
[170]
[171]
Patrick Gilot, Alain Brillard, Jean-François Brilhac, and Cornelius Schönnenbeck
Energy & Fuels, 2017
[172]
Miguel Angel Hernández, Gabriela Itzel Hernández, Roberto Portillo, Martha Alicia Salgado, Fernando Rojas, and Vitalii Petranovskii
Journal of Nanomaterials, 2017, Volume 2017, Page 1
[173]
Leilei Xu, Haoming Yang, Mindong Chen, Fagen Wang, Dongyang Nie, Lu Qi, Xinbo Lian, Hanxiang Chen, and Mei Wu
Journal of CO2 Utilization, 2017, Volume 21, Page 200
[174]
Karla K. Beltrame, André L. Cazetta, Patrícia S.C. de Souza, Lucas Spessato, Taís L. Silva, and Vitor C. Almeida
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2018, Volume 147, Page 64
[175]
Haidi Xu, Shuang Liu, Yun Wang, Qingjin Lin, Chenlu Lin, Li Lan, Qin Wang, and Yaoqiang Chen
Applied Surface Science, 2018, Volume 427, Page 656
[176]
Cheng Hu, Caroline Kirk, Joaquín Silvestre-Albero, Francisco Rodríguez-Reinoso, and Mark James Biggs
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017
[177]
Deepu J. Babu, Michael Bruns, and Jörg J. Schneider
Carbon, 2017
[178]
C. Ezquerro, A. E. Sepúlveda, A. Grau-Atienza, E. Serrano, E. Lalinde, J. R. Berenguer, and J. García-Martínez
J. Mater. Chem. C, 2017
[179]
Heitor O.N. Altino, Bruno E.S. Costa, and Renata N. da Cunha
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2017
[181]
Dong Li, Wengang Cui, Xiangping Zhang, Qinghua Meng, Qiucheng Zhou, Baoqi Ma, Menglong Niu, and Wenhong Li
Energy & Fuels, 2017
[182]
Fugang Wang, Zhaoxu Mi, Zhaojun Sun, Xufeng Li, Tianshan Lan, Yilong Yuan, and Tianfu Xu
Geofluids, 2017, Volume 2017, Page 1
[183]
Rana A. Sayed, Suzan E. Abd El Hafiz, Nada Gamal, Yasser GadelHak, and Waleed M.A. El Rouby
Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2017
[184]
Conchi O. Ania, Alicia Gomis-Berenguer, Joseph Dentzer, and Cathie Vix-Guterl
Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 2017
[186]
Yaning Li, Yufeng Duan, Hui Wang, Shilin Zhao, Mingming Chen, Meng Liu, and Hongqi Wei
Energy & Fuels, 2017
[189]
Sara Andreoli, Patricia Benito, Matilde V. Solmi, Giuseppe Fornasari, Alberto Villa, Bin Wu, and Stefania Albonetti
ChemistrySelect, 2017, Volume 2, Number 25, Page 7590
[191]
D.U.B. Aussems, K. Bystrov, I. Dogan, C. Arnas, M. Cabié, T. Neisius, M. Rasinski, E. Zoethout, P. Lipman, M.C.M. van de Sanden, and T.W. Morgan
Carbon, 2017
[192]
M. Berger, P. Fioux, S. Dorge, H. Nouali, D. Habermacher, E. Fiani, M. Vierling, M. Moliere, J. F. Brilhac, and J. Patarin
Catal. Sci. Technol., 2017
[193]
Paweena Dulyaseree, Masatsugu Fujishige, Ichiro Yoshida, Yumiko Toya, Yasuo Banba, Yu-suke Tanaka, Takaaki Aoyama, Mayuree Phonyiem, Winadda Wongwiriyapan, Kenji Takeuchi, and Morinobu Endo
RSC Adv., 2017, Volume 7, Number 67, Page 42064
[194]
Lingzhi Yang, Zhiyuan Liu, Zhi Liu, Wenyong Peng, Yunqi Liu, and Chenguang Liu
Petroleum Science and Technology, 2017, Volume 35, Number 10, Page 955
[195]
Eliana S. Da Silva, Nuno M.M. Moura, M. Graça P.M.S. Neves, Ana Coutinho, Manuel Prieto, Cláudia G. Silva, and Joaquim L. Faria
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017
[196]
Tiina Leiviskä, Jakub Matusik, Barbara Muir, and Juha Tanskanen
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017
[197]
Johannes Knossalla, Daniel Jalalpoor, and Ferdi Schüth
Chemistry of Materials, 2017
[198]
Elda-Zoraida Pina-Salazar, Koki Urita, Takuya Hayashi, Ryusuke Futamura, Fernando Vallejos-Burgos, Jerzy Włoch, Piotr Kowalczyk, Marek Wiśniewski, Toshio Sakai, Isamu Moriguchi, Artur P. Terzyk, Eiji Osawa, and Katsumi Kaneko
Langmuir, 2017
[199]
Nicola Zucchetto, Michael J. Reber, Lias Pestalozzi, Ramon Schmid, Antonia Neels, and Dominik Brühwiler
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[200]
M.O. Kazakov, K.A. Nadeina, I.G. Danilova, P.P. Dik, O.V. Klimov, V.Yu. Pereyma, E.Yu. Gerasimov, I.V. Dobryakova, E.E. Knyazeva, I.I. Ivanova, and A.S. Noskov
Catalysis Today, 2017
[201]
Ishtvan Boldog, Pavel Čičmanec, Yadolah Ganjkhanlou, and Roman Bulánek
Catalysis Today, 2017
[202]
Sibel Sogukkanli, Kenta Iyoki, Shanmugam P. Elangovan, Keiji Itabashi, and Tatsuya Okubo
Chemistry Letters, 2017, Volume 46, Number 9, Page 1419
[204]
Virginia Alcalde-Santiago, Arantxa Davó-Quiñonero, Ion Such-Basáñez, Dolores Lozano-Castelló, and Agustín Bueno-López
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017
[205]
Qiao Han, Kizuku Enoeda, Satoshi Inagaki, and Yoshihiro Kubota
Chemistry Letters, 2017, Volume 46, Number 9, Page 1434
[206]
J. Benedikt Mietner, Felix J. Brieler, Young Joo Lee, and Michael Fröba
Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 2017
[207]
Krittanun Deekamwong, Chokchai Kaiyasuan, Juthamas Jitcharoen, and Jatuporn Wittayakun
Materials Chemistry and Physics, 2017
[208]
J. Benedikt Mietner, Felix J. Brieler, Young Joo Lee, and Michael Fröba
Angewandte Chemie, 2017
[209]
G.V. Brião, S.L. Jahn, E.L. Foletto, and G.L. Dotto
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2017
[210]
Michał Zieliński, Bogdan Czajka, Mariusz Pietrowski, Iwona Tomska-Foralewska, Emilia Alwin, Monika Kot, and Maria Wojciechowska
Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, 2017
[211]
Carolina Belver, Mariana Hinojosa, Jorge Bedia, Montserrat Tobajas, Maria Alvarez, Vicente Rodríguez-González, and Juan Rodriguez
Materials, 2017, Volume 10, Number 8, Page 960
[212]
Cheng Hu, Caroline Kirk, Qiong Cai, Carlos Cuadrado-Collados, Joaquín Silvestre-Albero, Francisco Rodríguez-Reinoso, and Mark James Biggs
Advanced Energy Materials, 2017, Page 1701082
[213]
Bunyarat Rungtaweevoranit, Christian S. Diercks, Markus J. Kalmutzki, and Omar M. Yaghi
Faraday Discuss., 2017
[214]
Maria Manuel Serrano Bernardo, Catarina Alexandra Catanas Madeira, Nuno Carlos Lapa dos Santos Nunes, Diogo André Costa Messias Dias, Delfina Maria Barbosa Godinho, Maria Filomena de Jesus Pinto, Inês Alexandra Morgado do Nascimento Matos, Ana Paula Batista Carvalho, and Isabel Maria de Figueiredo Ligeiro Fonseca
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017
[215]
Vera V. Butova, Andriy P. Budnyk, Alexander A. Guda, Kirill A. Lomachenko, Aram L. Bugaev, Alexander V. Soldatov, Sachin M. Chavan, Sigurd Øien-Ødegaard, Unni Olsbye, Karl Petter Lillerud, Cesare Atzori, Silvia Bordiga, and Carlo Lamberti
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017
[217]
Christoph Klumpen, Florian Radakovitsch, Andreas Jess, and Jürgen Senker
Molecules, 2017, Volume 22, Number 8, Page 1343
[218]
Rafał Janus, Piotr Natkański, Mariusz Wądrzyk, Barbara Dudek, Marta Gajewska, and Piotr Kuśtrowski
Materials Today Communications, 2017
[219]
Zhoubing Huang, Shuqin Liu, Jianqiao Xu, Li Yin, Juan Zheng, Ningbo Zhou, and Gangfeng Ouyang
Analytica Chimica Acta, 2017
[220]
Piotr Kowalczyk, Jin Miyawaki, Yuki Azuma, Seong-Ho Yoon, Koji Nakabayashi, Piotr A. Gauden, Sylwester Furmaniak, Artur P. Terzyk, Marek Wisniewski, Jerzy Włoch, Katsumi Kaneko, and Alexander V. Neimark
Carbon, 2017
[221]
[222]
Ming Zhang, Yanchen Wei, Rui Li, Wenshuai Zhu, Hongping Li, Qi Zhang, Miao Wang, Xiao Chen, and Huaming Li
Fuel, 2017, Volume 209, Page 545
[223]
Javier Rivera De la Rosa, Carlos J Lucio-Ortiz, Celia D Pedroza-Solís, David De Haro-Del Rio, and Tomás Hernández García
International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering, 2017, Volume 0, Number 0
[224]
Tianyu Liu, Feng Zhang, Yu Song, and Yat Li
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 34, Page 17705
[225]
Carmen Rosa Silupú García, Rosa Liliana Solís Castro, Gerardo Juan Francisco Cruz Cerro, Mónica Marcela Gómez León, José Luís Solis Veliz, and Riitta L. Keiski
Revista Colombiana de Química, 2017, Volume 46, Number 3, Page 37
[226]
Sungyeon Heo, Jongwook Kim, Gary K. Ong, and Delia J. Milliron
Nano Letters, 2017
[227]
M. Pérez-Cadenas, M. Plaza-Recobert, G. Trautwein, and J. Alcañiz-Monge
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2018, Volume 256, Page 128
[228]
Diego R. Gondim, Juan A. Cecilia, Santângela O. Santos, Thainá N.B. Rodrigues, José E. Aguiar, Enrique Vilarrasa-García, Enrique Rodríguez-Castellón, Diana C.S. Azevedo, and Ivanildo J. Silva
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2017
[229]
N. Menshutina, S. Ivanov, P. Tsygankov, and I. Khudeev
Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, 2017
[230]
Elnaz Bahadori, Vincenzo Vaiano, Serena Esposito, Marco Armandi, Diana Sannino, and Barbara Bonelli
Catalysis Today, 2017
[231]
Omid H. Ardakani, Hamed Sanei, Amin Ghanizadeh, Margot McMechan, Filippo Ferri, and Christopher R. Clarkson
Fuel, 2017, Volume 209, Page 274
[232]
Dina Ahmed, Gamal El-Hiti, Emad Yousif, Ayad Hameed, and Mustafa Abdalla
Polymers, 2017, Volume 9, Number 8, Page 336
[234]
Darren P. Lapham and Julie L. Lapham
International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 2017, Volume 530, Number 1-2, Page 364
[235]
Alfred G. N. Wamba, Eder C. Lima, Sylvere K. Ndi, Pascal S. Thue, Joseph G. Kayem, Fabiano S. Rodembusch, Glaydson S. dos Reis, and Wagner S. de Alencar
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017
[237]
Peter Psarras, Randall Holmes, Vikram Vishal, and Jennifer Wilcox
Accounts of Chemical Research, 2017, Volume 50, Number 8, Page 1818
[238]
Nikolaos Kostoglou, Christian Koczwara, Christian Prehal, Velislava Terziyska, Biljana Babic, Branko Matovic, Georgios Constantinides, Christos Tampaxis, Georgia Charalambopoulou, Theodore Steriotis, Steve Hinder, Mark Baker, Kyriaki Polychronopoulou, Charalabos Doumanidis, Oskar Paris, Christian Mitterer, and Claus Rebholz
Nano Energy, 2017, Volume 40, Page 49
[239]
Huadong Yuan, Wenkui Zhang, Jian-guo Wang, Guangmin Zhou, Zhenzhan Zhuang, Jianmin Luo, Hui Huang, Yongping Gan, Chu Liang, Yang Xia, Jun Zhang, and Xinyong Tao
Energy Storage Materials, 2018, Volume 10, Page 1
[240]
Chi-Cong Tran, Filip Stankovikj, Manuel Garcia-Perez, and Serge Kaliaguine
Catalysis Communications, 2017, Volume 101, Page 71
[241]
Min Gu, Xuefu Xian, Shuo Duan, and Xidong Du
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2017
[242]
Daniel Schneider, Daria Kondrashova, and Rustem Valiullin
Scientific Reports, 2017, Volume 7, Number 1
[243]
Pedro S. F. Mendes, Anne-Lise Taleb, Anne-Sophie Gay, Antoine Daudin, Christophe Bouchy, João M. Silva, and M. Filipa Ribeiro
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 32, Page 16822
[244]
Armin Taheri, Ensieh Ganji Babakhani, and Jafar Towfighi Darian
Energy & Fuels, 2017, Volume 31, Number 8, Page 8792
[245]
[246]
Mohammad Ghashghaee, Samira Shirvani, and Mehdi Ghambarian
Applied Catalysis A: General, 2017, Volume 545, Page 134
[247]
N. Bhouri, N. Bhouri, A. Houngan, S. Bennasrallah, and P. Perre
Applied Thermal Engineering, 2017, Volume 126, Page 429
[248]
Erika Virmani, Ole Beyer, Ulrich Lüning, Uwe Ruschewitz, and Stefan Wuttke
Mater. Chem. Front., 2017
[249]
Jianxi Zhu, Ping Zhang, Yuebo Wang, Ke Wen, Xiaoli Su, Runliang Zhu, Hongping He, and Yunfei Xi
Applied Clay Science, 2017
[250]
C. Cara, E. Rombi, A. Musinu, V. Mameli, A. Ardu, M. Sanna Angotzi, L. Atzori, D. Niznansky, H. L. Xin, and C. Cannas
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017
[251]
Diana Ramos Lima, Laura Klein, and Guilherme Luiz Dotto
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017, Volume 24, Number 26, Page 21484
[252]
Yilai Jiao, Xiaolei Fan, Michal Perdjon, Zhenming Yang, and Jinsong Zhang
Applied Catalysis A: General, 2017, Volume 545, Page 104
[253]
Shuang Li, Li-Li Yu, Rong-Bing Li, Jun Fan, and Jing-Tai Zhao
Energy Storage Materials, 2017
[254]
William P. Krekelberg, Daniel W. Siderius, Vincent K. Shen, Thomas M. Truskett, and Jeffrey R. Errington
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017, Volume 121, Number 30, Page 16316
[255]
Stefania Marzorati, Roberto Bresciani, Stefano Checchia, Stefano Antenucci, Benedetta Sacchi, Vladimiro Dal Santo, Marco Scavini, and Mariangela Longhi
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017, Volume 121, Number 30, Page 16415
[257]
Chao Wang, Ye Xiong, Hanwei Wang, Chunde Jin, and Qingfeng Sun
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 30, Page 15759
[258]
Eliška Rezlerová, Arnošt Zukal, Jiří Čejka, Flor R. Siperstein, John K. Brennan, and Martin Lísal
Langmuir, 2017
[259]
Alessio Masala, Jenny G. Vitillo, Giorgia Mondino, Gianmario Martra, Richard Blom, Carlos A. Grande, and Silvia Bordiga
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2017, Volume 56, Number 30, Page 8485
[260]
Kinga Gołąbek, Karolina A. Tarach, and Kinga Góra-Marek
Dalton Trans., 2017, Volume 46, Number 30, Page 9934
[261]
Xiaodong Tian, Xiao Li, Tao Yang, Kai Wang, Hongbao Wang, Yan Song, Zhanjun Liu, Quangui Guo, and Chengmeng Chen
Electrochimica Acta, 2017, Volume 247, Page 1060
[262]
Yijun Zhong, Qian Lu, Yanping Zhu, Yinlong Zhu, Wei Zhou, Shaobin Wang, and Zongping Shao
Advanced Sustainable Systems, 2017, Volume 1, Number 8, Page 1700081
[263]
Sander Ratso, Ivar Kruusenberg, Maike Käärik, Mati Kook, Rando Saar, Petri Kanninen, Tanja Kallio, Jaan Leis, and Kaido Tammeveski
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017, Volume 219, Page 276
[264]
Antoine Tiya-Djowe, Nathalie Ruth, Georges Kamgang-Youbi, Elie Acayanka, Samuel Laminsi, and Eric M. Gaigneaux
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2018, Volume 255, Page 148
[265]
Alexander Sachse, Aida Grau-Atienza, Erika O. Jardim, Noemi Linares, Matthias Thommes, and Javier García-Martínez
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017, Volume 17, Number 8, Page 4289
[266]
María Ibáñez, Eva Epelde, Andrés T. Aguayo, Ana G. Gayubo, Javier Bilbao, and Pedro Castaño
Applied Catalysis A: General, 2017, Volume 543, Page 1
[267]
Joanna Goscianska, Anna Olejnik, and Izabela Nowak
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2017
[268]
Matthew E. Suss
Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 2017, Volume 164, Number 9, Page E270
[269]
Keke Wang, Yuanzhe Tang, Qin Jiang, Youshi Lan, Hongliang Huang, Dahuan Liu, and Chongli Zhong
Journal of Energy Chemistry, 2017
[270]
A. Atakan, P. Mäkie, F. Söderlind, J. Keraudy, E. M. Björk, and M. Odén
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2017, Volume 19, Number 29, Page 19139
[271]
Tingmin Di, Bicheng Zhu, Bei Cheng, Jiaguo Yu, and Jingsan Xu
Journal of Catalysis, 2017, Volume 352, Page 532
[272]
Lalchhingpuii, Diwakar Tiwari, Lalhmunsiama, and Seung Mok Lee
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 328, Page 434
[273]
Daniele Ongari, Peter G. Boyd, Senja Barthel, Matthew Witman, Maciej Haranczyk, and Berend Smit
Langmuir, 2017
[274]
Hao Zhou, Kangkai Li, Bingtao Zhao, Wenyi Deng, Yaxin Su, and Fangchuan Zhong
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 326, Page 737
[275]
Augusto Cezar D. Filho, Ana C. Mazzocato, Guilherme L. Dotto, Pascal S. Thue, and Flávio A. Pavan
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017, Volume 24, Number 24, Page 19909
[276]
Song Yu, Jiang Bo, Li Fengli, and Liu Jiegang
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 253, Page 191
[278]
Nicholas M. Musyoka, Jianwei Ren, Henrietta W. Langmi, Brian C. North, Mkhulu Mathe, and Dmitri Bessarabov
Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2017, Volume 724, Page 450
[279]
Janina Dechnik, Alexander Nuhnen, and Christoph Janiak
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017, Volume 17, Number 8, Page 4090
[280]
Arnošt Zukal, Martin Kubů, and Jakub Pastva
Journal of CO2 Utilization, 2017, Volume 21, Page 9
[282]
Belén Lobato, Loreto Suárez, Laura Guardia, and Teresa A. Centeno
Carbon, 2017, Volume 122, Page 434
[283]
Lalhmunsiama, Seung Lee, Suk Choi, and Diwakar Tiwari
Metals, 2017, Volume 7, Number 7, Page 248
[284]
Vinícius P. S. Caldeira, Anne G. D. Santos, Daniele S. Oliveira, Rafael B. Lima, Luiz D. Souza, and Sibele B. C. Pergher
Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 2017
[285]
Sven F. Plappert, Jean-Marie Nedelec, Harald Rennhofer, Helga C. Lichtenegger, and Falk W. Liebner
Chemistry of Materials, 2017, Volume 29, Number 16, Page 6630
[286]
Bita Abedi Rad, Aliakbar Tarlani, Saeed Jameh-Bozorghi, and Ali Niazi
Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, 2017, Volume 83, Number 3, Page 627
[287]
Kateřina Břendová, Jiřina Száková, Miloslav Lhotka, Tereza Krulikovská, Miroslav Punčochář, and Pavel Tlustoš
Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 2017
[288]
Gelines Moreno-Fernandez, Joaquin Ibañez, Jose M. Rojo, and Mirko Kunowsky
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2017, Volume 2017, Page 1
[289]
Stefan Suckert, Michał Rams, Marek M. Rams, and Christian Näther
Inorganic Chemistry, 2017, Volume 56, Number 14, Page 8007
[290]
Anton S. Shalygin, Alexey L. Nuzhdin, Galina A. Bukhtiyarova, and Oleg N. Martyanov
Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, 2017
[292]
D. Kryszak, K. Stawicka, M. Trejda, V. Calvino-Casilda, R. Martin-Aranda, and M. Ziolek
Catal. Sci. Technol., 2017
[293]
Christopher M. R. Wright, Kanittika Ruengkajorn, Alexander F. R. Kilpatrick, Jean-Charles Buffet, and Dermot O’Hare
Inorganic Chemistry, 2017, Volume 56, Number 14, Page 7842
[294]
Huiqin Li, Jingtao Hu, Yuanyuan Cao, Xianhua Li, and Xiaojing Wang
Bioresource Technology, 2017
[295]
Darja Maučec, Andraž Šuligoj, Alenka Ristić, Goran Dražić, Albin Pintar, and Nataša Novak Tušar
Catalysis Today, 2017
[296]
Matteo Minelli, Donald R. Paul, and Giulio C. Sarti
Journal of Membrane Science, 2017, Volume 540, Page 229
[297]
Daniel G. Gregory, Qianying Guo, Li Lu, Christopher J. Kiely, and Mark A. Snyder
Langmuir, 2017, Volume 33, Number 26, Page 6601
[298]
Jiaojiao Lei, Huating Song, Yibin Wei, Shuaifei Zhao, and Hong Qi
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 253, Page 55
[299]
Maria Ignat, Petrisor Samoila, Cristina Coromelci, Liviu Sacarescu, Iuliean Asaftei, Valeria Harabagiu, and Camelia Miron
Comptes Rendus Chimie, 2017
[300]
Elise M. Albuquerque, Luiz E. P. Borges, Marco A. Fraga, and Carsten Sievers
ChemCatChem, 2017, Volume 9, Number 14, Page 2675
[301]
Mohamed Abdel Salam, Samia A. Kosa, and Ahlam A. Al-Beladi
Journal of Molecular Liquids, 2017, Volume 241, Page 469
[302]
Zoulikha Talha, Cherifa Bachir, Sarah Ziri, Salima Bellahouel, Abdelkader Bengueddach, Frédéric Villièras, Manuel Pelletier, Peter G. Weidler, and Rachida Hamacha
Catalysis Letters, 2017, Volume 147, Number 8, Page 2116
[303]
Jingjing Yang, Christopher A. Trickett, Salman B. Alahmadi, Ahmad S. Alshammari, and Omar M. Yaghi
Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2017, Volume 139, Number 24, Page 8118
[304]
Oluseun Akintola, David Hornig, Axel Buchholz, Helmar Görls, and Winfried Plass
Dalton Trans., 2017, Volume 46, Number 25, Page 8037
[305]
Juliana F. De Conto, Marília R. Oliveira, Ronney J. Oliveira, Kelvis V. Campos, Eliana W. De Menezes, Edilson V. Benvenutti, Elton Franceschi, Cesar C. Santana, and Silvia M. Egues
Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, 2017, Volume 471, Page 209
[306]
Alexander Rinkenburger, Takaaki Toriyama, Kazuhiro Yasuda, and Reinhard Niessner
ChemCatChem, 2017
[307]
Wang Yang, Wu Yang, Ailing Song, Lijun Gao, Li Su, and Guangjie Shao
Journal of Power Sources, 2017, Volume 359, Page 556
[308]
João F. Gomes, Inês Leal, Katarzyna Bednarczyk, Marta Gmurek, Marek Stelmachowski, Adriana Zaleska-Medynska, M. Emília Quinta-Ferreira, Raquel Costa, Rosa M. Quinta-Ferreira, and Rui C. Martins
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2017, Volume 5, Number 4, Page 3065
[309]
Stefan Rannabauer, Gerrit-Maximilian Söffker, Marcel Scheunemann, Ulf Betke, and Michael Scheffler
Advanced Engineering Materials, 2017, Page 1700211
[310]
Simon Fleischmann, Marco Zeiger, Nicolas Jäckel, Benjamin Krüner, Valeria Lemkova, Mathias Widmaier, and Volker Presser
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 25, Page 13039
[311]
Dario S Facio, Luis A M Carrascosa, and María J Mosquera
Nanotechnology, 2017, Volume 28, Number 26, Page 265601
[312]
Patrícia da Luz Mesquita, Cássia Ribeiro Souza, Nilza Tatiane G. Santos, and Sônia Denise Ferreira Rocha
Environmental Technology, 2017, Page 1
[313]
C. Prehal, C. Koczwara, N. Jäckel, H. Amenitsch, V. Presser, and O. Paris
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2017, Volume 19, Number 23, Page 15549
[314]
Babak Mazinani, Ali Beitollahi, Abdul Kadir Masrom, Leila Samiee, and Zohre Ahmadi
Ceramics International, 2017, Volume 43, Number 15, Page 11786
[315]
Kitt Panyarat, Sireenart Surinwong, Timothy J. Prior, Takumi Konno, and Apinpus Rujiwatra
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 251, Page 155
[316]
Hom N. Sharma, Stephen J. Harley, Yunwei Sun, and Elizabeth A. Glascoe
Scientific Reports, 2017, Volume 7, Number 1
[317]
Ryan A. Adams, Vilas G. Pol, and Arvind Varma
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2017, Volume 56, Number 25, Page 7173
[318]
Dong Xu, Ying Tong, Tingting Yan, Liyi Shi, and Dengsong Zhang
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2017, Volume 5, Number 7, Page 5810
[319]
Nada Ben Ahmed, Sylvie Masse, Guillaume Laurent, Jean-Yves Piquemal, Claude Yéprémian, Roberta Brayner, and Thibaud Coradin
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 2017
[320]
Juan A. Ramos Guivar, Elahe Sadrollahi, Dirk Menzel, Edson G. Ramos Fernandes, Elvis O. López, Marco Morales Torres, Jesús M. Arsuaga, Amaya Arencibia, and F. Jochen Litterst
RSC Adv., 2017, Volume 7, Number 46, Page 28763
[321]
Marcus Einert, Tobias Weller, Thomas Leichtweiß, Bernd M. Smarsly, and Roland Marschall
ChemPhotoChem, 2017, Volume 1, Number 7, Page 326
[322]
Rachele Castaldo, Roberto Avolio, Mariacristina Cocca, Gennaro Gentile, Maria Emanuela Errico, Maurizio Avella, Cosimo Carfagna, and Veronica Ambrogi
Macromolecules, 2017, Volume 50, Number 11, Page 4132
[323]
R. Gautier, T. Dbouk, M.A. Campesi, L. Hamon, J.-L. Harion, and P. Pré
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017
[324]
Mathieu Salanne
Topics in Current Chemistry, 2017, Volume 375, Number 3
[325]
Colin McKinstry, Edmund J. Cussen, Ashleigh J. Fletcher, Siddharth V. Patwardhan, and Jan Sefcik
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 326, Page 570
[326]
Apolo Nambo, Juan He, Tu Quang Nguyen, Veerendra Atla, Thad Druffel, and Mahendra Sunkara
Nano Letters, 2017, Volume 17, Number 6, Page 3327
[327]
Xin Qian, Bing Wang, Zhao-Qi Zhu, Han-Xue Sun, Feng Ren, Peng Mu, Chonghua Ma, Wei-Dong Liang, and An Li
Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2017, Volume 338, Page 224
[328]
Christian Balzer, Anna M. Waag, Stefan Gehret, Gudrun Reichenauer, Florian Putz, Nicola Hüsing, Oskar Paris, Noam Bernstein, Gennady Y. Gor, and Alexander V. Neimark
Langmuir, 2017, Volume 33, Number 22, Page 5592
[329]
Christina Schneidermann, Nicolas Jäckel, Steffen Oswald, Lars Giebeler, Volker Presser, and Lars Borchardt
ChemSusChem, 2017, Volume 10, Number 11, Page 2416
[331]
Juan Cecilia, Ana Arango-Díaz, Jaasiel Marrero-Jerez, Pedro Núñez, Elisa Moretti, Loretta Storaro, and Enrique Rodríguez-Castellón
Catalysts, 2017, Volume 7, Number 6, Page 160
[332]
Amani L. Lee, Clifford T. Gee, Bradley P. Weegman, Samuel A. Einstein, Adam R. Juelfs, Hattie L. Ring, Katie R. Hurley, Sam M. Egger, Garrett Swindlehurst, Michael Garwood, William C. K. Pomerantz, and Christy L. Haynes
ACS Nano, 2017, Volume 11, Number 6, Page 5623
[333]
G. Gatti, D. Costenaro, C. Vittoni, G. Paul, V. Crocellà, E. Mangano, S. Brandani, S. Bordiga, M. Cossi, L. Marchese, and C. Bisio
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2017, Volume 19, Number 21, Page 14114
[334]
Ward Huybrechts, Jeroen Lauwaert, Anton De Vylder, Myrjam Mertens, Gregor Mali, Joris W. Thybaut, Pascal Van Der Voort, and Pegie Cool
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 251, Page 1
[335]
Jeferson S Piccin, Mariliz Guterres, Nina Paula G Salau, and Guilherme L Dotto
Adsorption Science & Technology, 2017, Volume 35, Number 3-4, Page 300
[336]
Nancy Ornelas-Soto, Rodrigo Rubio-Govea, Carlos E. Guerrero-Beltrán, Eduardo Vázquez-Garza, Judith Bernal-Ramírez, Alejandra García-García, Yuriana Oropeza-Almazán, Gerardo García-Rivas, and Flavio F. Contreras-Torres
Materials Science and Engineering: C, 2017, Volume 79, Page 831
[337]
Ryan A. Adams, Jia-Min Syu, Yunpu Zhao, Chieh-Tsung Lo, Arvind Varma, and Vilas G. Pol
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 21, Page 17872
[338]
Tian-Feng Hou, Ramireddy Boppella, Arunkumar Shanmugasundaram, Dong Ha Kim, and Dong-Weon Lee
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, Volume 42, Number 22, Page 15126
[339]
Yao Zhang, Catherine A. Davy, Gregory Tricot, Cyrille Albert-Mercier, Natacha Henry, Pieter Bertier, Frédéric Cazaux, Denis Damidot, and Xavier Bourbon
Journal of the American Ceramic Society, 2017
[340]
Timo Rhauderwiek, Niclas Heidenreich, Helge Reinsch, Sigurd Øien-Ødegaard, Kirill A. Lomachenko, Uta Rütt, Alexander V. Soldatov, Karl Petter Lillerud, and Norbert Stock
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017, Volume 17, Number 6, Page 3462
[341]
Ulrike Junghans, Merten Kobalz, Oliver Erhart, Hannes Preißler, Jörg Lincke, Jens Möllmer, Harald Krautscheid, and Roger Gläser
Materials, 2017, Volume 10, Number 4, Page 338
[342]
Victoria Krupskaya, Sergey Zakusin, Ekaterina Tyupina, Olga Dorzhieva, Anatoliy Zhukhlistov, Petr Belousov, and Maria Timofeeva
Minerals, 2017, Volume 7, Number 4, Page 49
[343]
I. Murillo Leo, E. Soto, F. Vaquero, N. Mota, B. Garcia, D. Liuzzi, R. Guil-López, R. M. Navarro, and J. L. G. Fierro
Topics in Catalysis, 2017
[344]
Erik Troschke, Sven Grätz, Tilo Lübken, and Lars Borchardt
Angewandte Chemie, 2017, Volume 129, Number 24, Page 6963
[345]
Huiqin Li, Jingtao Hu, Chuan Wang, and Xiaojing Wang
Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 2017, Volume 228, Number 6
[347]
Martín M. Dávila-Jiménez, María P. Elizalde-González, Esmeralda García-Díaz, Miguel González, M. E. Mendoza, and M. J. Robles-Águila
Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part B, 2017, Volume 52, Number 8, Page 538
[348]
Shida Chen, Shu Tao, Dazhen Tang, Hao Xu, Song Li, Junlong Zhao, Qi Jiang, and Haoxin Yang
Energy & Fuels, 2017, Volume 31, Number 6, Page 6034
[349]
Erik Troschke, Sven Grätz, Tilo Lübken, and Lars Borchardt
Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 2017, Volume 56, Number 24, Page 6859
[351]
Alexey Klechikov, Jinhua Sun, Guangzhi Hu, Mingbo Zheng, Thomas Wågberg, and Alexandr V. Talyzin
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 250, Page 27
[352]
Miryam Gil-Calvo, Cristina Jiménez-González, Beatriz de Rivas, Jose I. Gutiérrez-Ortiz, and Rubén López-Fonseca
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2017, Volume 56, Number 21, Page 6186
[353]
Bing Chao, Mas Iwan Konggidinata, Lu Lin, Mark Zappi, and Daniel Dianchen Gang
Journal of Water Process Engineering, 2017, Volume 17, Page 256
[354]
Romuald Coupan, Frédéric Plantier, Jean-Philippe Torré, Christophe Dicharry, Pascale Sénéchal, Fabrice Guerton, Peter Moonen, Abdel Khoukh, Sid Ahmed Kessas, and Mehrdji Hemati
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 325, Page 35
[355]
Ruohong Sui, Sarah K. Carefoot, Christopher B. Lavery, Connor E. Deering, Kevin L. Lesage, Nancy Chou, Chelsea J. Rose, and Robert A. Marriott
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 20, Page 9561
[356]
Yanping Ren, Ruiyu Ding, Hairong Yue, Siyang Tang, Changjun Liu, Jinbo Zhao, Wen Lin, and Bin Liang
Applied Energy, 2017, Volume 198, Page 250
[357]
Silo Meoto, Niall Kent, Michael M. Nigra, and Marc-Olivier Coppens
Langmuir, 2017, Volume 33, Number 19, Page 4823
[358]
Kaizhong Zhang, Yuanping Cheng, Kan Jin, Haijun Guo, Qingquan Liu, Jun Dong, and Wei Li
Energy & Fuels, 2017, Volume 31, Number 5, Page 4731
[359]
Christian Wittee Lopes, Jhonny Villarroel-Rocha, Bernardo Araldi Da Silva, Marcelo Luis Mignoni, and Sibele Berenice Castellã Pergher
Materials Research, 2016, Volume 19, Number 6, Page 1461
[360]
Reza Malek Abbaslou, Vahid Vosoughi, and Ajay K. Dalai
Applied Surface Science, 2017, Volume 419, Page 817
[361]
Shaolei Wang, Chengxin Zhang, Yu Shu, Shulan Jiang, Qi Xia, Linjiang Chen, Shangbin Jin, Irshad Hussain, Andrew I. Cooper, and Bien Tan
Science Advances, 2017, Volume 3, Number 3, Page e1602610
[362]
Juan E Aristizábal-Fontal, Farid B Cortés, and Camilo A Franco
Adsorption Science & Technology, 2017, Page 026361741770430
[363]
A. Gil, A.M. García, M. Fernández, M.A. Vicente, B. González-Rodríguez, V. Rives, and S.A. Korili
Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2017, Volume 53, Page 183
[364]
Jérémie Huynh, Ruben Palacio, Fariba Safizadeh, Grégory Lefèvre, Michael Descostes, Lilian Eloy, Nadia Guignard, Julie Rousseau, Sébastien Royer, Emmanuel Tertre, and Isabelle Batonneau-Gener
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 18, Page 15672
[365]
Philipp Müller, Volodymyr Bon, Irena Senkovska, Jürgen Getzschmann, Manfred S. Weiss, and Stefan Kaskel
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017, Volume 17, Number 6, Page 3221
[366]
Daniel F. Molina-Campos, Rafael A. Fonseca-Correa, Diana P. Vargas-Delgadillo, Liliana Giraldo, and Juan Carlos Moreno-Piraján
Data in Brief, 2017, Volume 12, Page 409
[367]
Hongmei Tang, Dong Yan, Ting Lu, and Likun Pan
Electrochimica Acta, 2017, Volume 241, Page 63
[368]
E. Vilarrasa-García, J.A. Cecilia, D.C.S. Azevedo, C.L. Cavalcante, and E. Rodríguez-Castellón
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 249, Page 25
[369]
Alexander Sachse and Javier García-Martínez
Chemistry of Materials, 2017, Volume 29, Number 9, Page 3827
[370]
Jie Ren, Jing-Pei Cao, Xiao-Yan Zhao, Fu Wei, Tian-Long Liu, Xing Fan, Yun-Peng Zhao, and Xian-Yong Wei
Fuel, 2017, Volume 202, Page 345
[371]
Lingzhi Yang, Zhiyuan Liu, Zhi Liu, Wenyong Peng, Yunqi Liu, and Chenguang Liu
Chinese Journal of Catalysis, 2017, Volume 38, Number 4, Page 683
[372]
Peng Li, Nicolaas A. Vermeulen, Christos D. Malliakas, Diego A. Gómez-Gualdrón, Ashlee J. Howarth, B. Layla Mehdi, Alice Dohnalkova, Nigel D. Browning, Michael O’Keeffe, and Omar K. Farha
Science, 2017, Volume 356, Number 6338, Page 624
[373]
Nicolas Chaoui, Matthias Trunk, Robert Dawson, Johannes Schmidt, and Arne Thomas
Chem. Soc. Rev., 2017, Volume 46, Number 11, Page 3302
[374]
Oluseun Akintola, Sven Ziegenbalg, Axel Buchholz, Helmar Görls, and Winfried Plass
CrystEngComm, 2017, Volume 19, Number 20, Page 2723
[376]
Mizuho Yabushita, Peng Li, Kathleen A. Durkin, Hirokazu Kobayashi, Atsushi Fukuoka, Omar K. Farha, and Alexander Katz
Langmuir, 2017, Volume 33, Number 17, Page 4129
[377]
Rafael A. Fonseca-Correa, Liliana Giraldo, and Juan Carlos Moreno-Piraján
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 248, Page 164
[379]
Lingqian Meng, Brahim Mezari, Maarten G. Goesten, and Emiel J. M. Hensen
Chemistry of Materials, 2017, Volume 29, Number 9, Page 4091
[380]
Hassan M.A. Hassan, Mohamed A. Betiha, Shaimaa K. Mohamed, E.A. El-Sharkawy, and Emad A. Ahmed
Journal of Molecular Liquids, 2017, Volume 236, Page 385
[381]
Yuththaphan Phongboonchoo, Nutthavich Thouchprasitchai, and Sangobtip Pongstabodee
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, Volume 42, Number 17, Page 12220
[382]
Jiuqing Wen, Jun Xie, Hongdan Zhang, Aiping Zhang, Yingju Liu, Xiaobo Chen, and Xin Li
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 16, Page 14031
[383]
Carmen Pilar Jiménez-Gómez, Juan A. Cecilia, Ramón Moreno-Tost, and Pedro Maireles-Torres
Topics in Catalysis, 2017
[384]
J. Lladó, R.R. Gil, C. Lao-Luque, M. Solé-Sardans, E. Fuente, and B. Ruiz
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2017, Volume 5, Number 3, Page 2090
[385]
D. Dias, N. Lapa, M. Bernardo, D. Godinho, I. Fonseca, M. Miranda, F. Pinto, and F. Lemos
Waste Management, 2017, Volume 65, Page 186
[386]
M. Consuelo Alvarez-Galvan, Gema Blanco-Brieva, Maricarmen Capel-Sanchez, Silvia Morales-delaRosa, Jose M. Campos-Martin, and Jose L.G. Fierro
Catalysis Today, 2017
[387]
Valentina Crocellà, Tommaso Tabanelli, Jenny G. Vitillo, Daniele Costenaro, Chiara Bisio, Fabrizio Cavani, and Silvia Bordiga
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017, Volume 211, Page 323
[388]
Fernando Gómez-Sanz, María Virtudes Morales-Vargas, Beatriz González-Rodríguez, María Luisa Rojas-Cervantes, and Elena Pérez-Mayoral
Applied Clay Science, 2017, Volume 143, Page 250
[389]
Huashun Ji, Wenhao Wu, Feihu Li, Xiaoxue Yu, Jingjing Fu, and Luyao Jia
Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2017, Volume 334, Page 212
[391]
Zhewei Yu, Johnny Deschamps, Lomig Hamon, Prasanth Karikkethu Prabhakaran, and Pascaline Pré
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 248, Page 72
[392]
Nanshi Wu, Jingxiang Low, Tao Liu, Jiaguo Yu, and Shaowen Cao
Applied Surface Science, 2017, Volume 413, Page 35
[393]
George S. Pappas, Chaoying Wan, Chris Bowen, David M. Haddleton, and Xiaobin Huang
RSC Adv., 2017, Volume 7, Number 32, Page 19674
[394]
Preeyanuch Sangtrirutnugul, Thanawat Chaiprasert, Warodom Hunsiri, Thanudkit Jitjaroendee, Patsaya Songkhum, Kritapas Laohhasurayotin, Tanakorn Osotchan, and Vuthichai Ervithayasuporn
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 14, Page 12812
[395]
Vahid Vosoughi, Sandeep Badoga, Ajay K. Dalai, and Nicolas Abatzoglou
Fuel Processing Technology, 2017, Volume 162, Page 55
[396]
Liangliang Deng, Peng Yuan, Dong Liu, Faïza Annabi-Bergaya, Junming Zhou, Fanrong Chen, and Zongwen Liu
Applied Clay Science, 2017, Volume 143, Page 184
[397]
Zhi-Qiang Hao, Jing-Pei Cao, Yan Wu, Xiao-Yan Zhao, Li Zhou, Xing Fan, Yun-Peng Zhao, and Xian-Yong Wei
Fuel Processing Technology, 2017, Volume 162, Page 45
[398]
Gennady Y. Gor, Patrick Huber, and Noam Bernstein
Applied Physics Reviews, 2017, Volume 4, Number 1, Page 011303
[399]
Hussien Noby, Ahmed El-Shazly, Marwa Elkady, and Masahiro Ohshima
Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan, 2017, Volume 50, Number 3, Page 170
[401]
Sofia M. Morozova, Alexander S. Shaplov, Elena I. Lozinskaya, David Mecerreyes, Haritz Sardon, Sonia Zulfiqar, Fabian Suárez-García, and Yakov S. Vygodskii
Macromolecules, 2017, Volume 50, Number 7, Page 2814
[402]
Qi Xin, Aggeliki Papavasilou, Nikos Boukos, Antonella Glisenti, Jerry Pui Ho Li, Yong Yang, Constantine J. Philippopoulos, Evangelos Poulakis, Fotis K. Katsaros, Vera Meynen, and Pegie Cool
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017
[403]
M. Hureau, A. Moissette, L. Tzanis, and T.J. Daou
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017
[404]
Suvendu Sekhar Mondal, Subarna Dey, Ahmed G. Attallah, Reinhard Krause-Rehberg, Christoph Janiak, and Hans-Jürgen Holdt
Dalton Trans., 2017, Volume 46, Number 14, Page 4824
[405]
Shaowen Cao, Qian Huang, Bicheng Zhu, and Jiaguo Yu
Journal of Power Sources, 2017, Volume 351, Page 151
[406]
Giulia Molino, Alessandra Bari, Francesco Baino, Sonia Fiorilli, and Chiara Vitale-Brovarone
Journal of Materials Science, 2017, Volume 52, Number 15, Page 9103
[407]
Louis Lefrançois Perreault, Simon Giret, Maxime Gagnon, Justyna Florek, Dominic Larivière, and Freddy Kleitz
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 13, Page 12003
[408]
Moorthy Padmini, Sarigamala Karthik Kiran, Narayanan Lakshminarasimhan, Marappan Sathish, and Perumal Elumalai
Electrochimica Acta, 2017, Volume 236, Page 359
[409]
Yuxin Wang, Jianjun Song, Nathan C. Baxter, Guan-Tsern Kuo, and Shengnian Wang
Journal of Catalysis, 2017, Volume 349, Page 53
[410]
Brett M. Paterson, Keith F. White, Jonathan M. White, Brendan F. Abrahams, and Paul S. Donnelly
Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 2017, Volume 56, Number 29, Page 8370
[411]
Dario S. Facio, Manuel Luna, and Maria J. Mosquera
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 247, Page 166
[412]
Brett M. Paterson, Keith F. White, Jonathan M. White, Brendan F. Abrahams, and Paul S. Donnelly
Angewandte Chemie, 2017, Volume 129, Number 29, Page 8490
[413]
Masatsugu Fujishige, Ichiro Yoshida, Yumiko Toya, Yasuo Banba, Kyo-ichi Oshida, Yu-suke Tanaka, Paweena Dulyaseree, Winadda Wongwiriyapan, and Kenji Takeuchi
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2017, Volume 5, Number 2, Page 1801
[414]
Susana C.R. Marques, Jossano M. Marcuzzo, Mauricio R. Baldan, Ana S. Mestre, and Ana P. Carvalho
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 321, Page 233
[415]
Mukesh Sharma, Dibyendu Mondal, Nripat Singh, Kapil Upadhyay, Akhilesh Rawat, Ranjitsinh V. Devkar, Rosy Alphons Sequeira, and Kamalesh Prasad
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2017, Volume 5, Number 4, Page 3488
[416]
Zhewei Yu, Johnny Deschamps, Lomig Hamon, Prasanth Karikkethu Prabhakaran, and Pascaline Pré
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, Volume 42, Number 12, Page 8021
[417]
Andigoni Apostolopoulou, Dimitra Sygkridou, Andreas Rapsomanikis, Alexandros N. Kalarakis, and Elias Stathatos
Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, 2017, Volume 166, Page 100
[418]
Negar Kavoosi, Volodymyr Bon, Irena Senkovska, Simon Krause, Cesare Atzori, Francesca Bonino, Julia Pallmann, Silvia Paasch, Eike Brunner, and Stefan Kaskel
Dalton Trans., 2017, Volume 46, Number 14, Page 4685
[419]
Cindy J. Elles-Pérez, Amner Muñoz-Acevedo, Andrés Guzmán, Hernando Camargo, and José Henao
Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, Volume 196, Page 466
[420]
Tieliang Liu, Fang Jin, Xianqiao Wang, Yangchun Fan, and Ming Yuan
Catalysis Today, 2017
[421]
Nobuhiro Ishito, Kiyotaka Nakajima, Yoshifumi Maegawa, Shinji Inagaki, and Atsushi Fukuoka
Catalysis Today, 2017
[422]
Sainan Zhou, Chen Guo, Zhonghua Wu, Maohuai Wang, Zhaojie Wang, Shuxian Wei, Shaoren Li, and Xiaoqing Lu
Applied Surface Science, 2017, Volume 410, Page 259
[423]
Y.L. Verma, A.K. Tripathi, Shalu, V.K. Singh, L. Balo, H. Gupta, S.K. Singh, and R.K. Singh
Materials Science and Engineering: B, 2017, Volume 220, Page 37
[424]
Xuan Hu, Changwei Shao, Jun Wang, and Hao Wang
Journal of Materials Science, 2017, Volume 52, Number 12, Page 7555
[425]
Wenxi Ren, Gensheng Li, Shouceng Tian, Mao Sheng, and Lidong Geng
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2017, Volume 56, Number 12, Page 3446
[426]
David A. Rubinos, Víctor Valcárcel, Giovanni Spagnoli, and María Teresa Barral
JOM, 2017, Volume 69, Number 9, Page 1607
[427]
Elliot J. Carrington, Craig A. McAnally, Ashleigh J. Fletcher, Stephen P. Thompson, Mark Warren, and Lee Brammer
Nature Chemistry, 2017, Volume 9, Number 9, Page 882
[428]
Kelin He, Jun Xie, Xingyi Luo, Jiuqing Wen, Song Ma, Xin Li, Yueping Fang, and Xiangchao Zhang
Chinese Journal of Catalysis, 2017, Volume 38, Number 2, Page 240
[429]
Daniel Vallejo-Sánchez, Pilar Amo-Ochoa, Garikoitz Beobide, Oscar Castillo, Michael Fröba, Frank Hoffmann, Antonio Luque, Pilar Ocón, and Sonia Pérez-Yáñez
Advanced Functional Materials, 2017, Volume 27, Number 15, Page 1605448
[430]
Vitória Segabinazzi Foletto, Ananda Bulegon Ferreira, Eric da Cruz Severo, Gabriela Carvalho Collazzo, Edson Luiz Foletto, and Guilherme Luiz Dotto
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017, Volume 24, Number 11, Page 10547
[431]
Craig Wilson, Marcus J. Main, Nicholas J. Cooper, Michael E. Briggs, Andrew I. Cooper, and Dave J. Adams
Polym. Chem., 2017, Volume 8, Number 12, Page 1914
[432]
Alexander M Puziy, Yuriy N Kochkin, Olga I Poddubnaya, and Mykola M Tsyba
Adsorption Science & Technology, 2017, Volume 35, Number 5-6, Page 473
[433]
Lishu Shao, Yong Li, Ting Zhang, Mingqiang Liu, and Jianhan Huang
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2017, Volume 56, Number 11, Page 2984
[434]
Fatemeh Karimi, Aimy Bazylak, and Brant A. Peppley
Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 2017, Volume 164, Number 4, Page F464
[435]
A. Tamayo, M.A. Mazo, M.D. Veiga, R. Ruiz-Caro, F. Notario-Pérez, and J. Rubio
Materials Science and Engineering: C, 2017, Volume 75, Page 1097
[436]
L. Perrier, F. Plantier, and D. Grégoire
Review of Scientific Instruments, 2017, Volume 88, Number 3, Page 035104
[437]
Kai Wan, Ai-dong Tan, Zhi-peng Yu, Zhen-xing Liang, Jin-hua Piao, and Panagiotis Tsiakaras
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017, Volume 209, Page 447
[439]
Ewa Skwarek, Olena Goncharuk, Dariusz Sternik, Wladyslaw Janusz, Karolina Gdula, and Vladimir M. Gun’ko
Nanoscale Research Letters, 2017, Volume 12, Number 1
[440]
Mingliang Liang, Zongxiu Wang, Li Gao, Chunlin Li, and Huijun Li
Fuel, 2017, Volume 197, Page 310
[441]
Magdalena Jabłońska, Wirawan Ciptonugroho, Kinga Góra-Marek, Mohammad G. Al-Shaal, and Regina Palkovits
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 245, Page 31
[442]
Liang Fang, Li Wang, Tao Zhou, Lihua Liu, Jian Zhou, and Menglin Li
Applied Clay Science, 2017, Volume 141, Page 88
[443]
Miryam Gil-Calvo, Cristina Jiménez-González, Beatriz de Rivas, Jose Ignacio Gutiérrez-Ortiz, and Rubén López-Fonseca
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017, Volume 209, Page 128
[444]
Michael Dreifke, Felix J. Brieler, and Michael Fröba
ChemCatChem, 2017, Volume 9, Number 7, Page 1197
[445]
Catalina Rodriguez Correa, Maria Bernardo, Rui P.P.L. Ribeiro, Isabel A.A.C. Esteves, and Andrea Kruse
Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis, 2017, Volume 124, Page 461
[446]
Kelin He, Jun Xie, Zhuohong Yang, Rongchen Shen, Yueping Fang, Song Ma, Xiaobo Chen, and Xin Li
Catal. Sci. Technol., 2017, Volume 7, Number 5, Page 1193
[447]
Hakan Bildirir, Vasilis G. Gregoriou, Apostolos Avgeropoulos, Ullrich Scherf, and Christos L. Chochos
Mater. Horiz., 2017, Volume 4, Number 4, Page 546
[448]
Camilo Sanchez, Felix Jeremias, Sebastian-Johannes Ernst, and Stefan K. Henninger
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 244, Page 151
[449]
Zhipeng Yu, Jinhua Piao, and Zhenxing Liang
Materials, 2017, Volume 10, Number 2, Page 197
[450]
Arantxa Davó-Quiñonero, Jorge González-Mira, Ion Such-Basañez, Jerónimo Juan-Juan, Dolores Lozano-Castelló, and Agustín Bueno-López
Catalysts, 2017, Volume 7, Number 2, Page 67
[451]
Christian Weinberger, Zimei Chen, Wolfgang Birnbaum, Dirk Kuckling, and Michael Tiemann
European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry, 2017, Volume 2017, Number 6, Page 1026
[452]
A.C. Sola, M. Broch Gösser, P. Ramírez de la Piscina, and N. Homs
Catalysis Today, 2017, Volume 287, Page 85
[453]
Xiaofei Shi, Youjin Yao, Yulong Xu, Kun Liu, Guangshan Zhu, Lifeng Chi, and Guang Lu
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 8, Page 7481
[454]
Ye Zheng, Cale D. Fahrenholtz, Christopher L. Hackett, Song Ding, Cynthia S. Day, Rohan Dhall, Glen S. Marrs, Michael D. Gross, Ravi Singh, and Ulrich Bierbach
Chemistry - A European Journal, 2017, Volume 23, Number 14, Page 3386
[455]
Juan Matos, Silvania Lanfredi, Ricmary Montaña, Marcos A.L. Nobre, María C. Fernández de Córdoba, and Conchi O. Ania
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2017, Volume 496, Page 211
[456]
Nabel Kalel Asmel, Abdull Rahim Mohd Yusoff, Lakkaboyana Sivarama Krishna, Zaiton Abdul Majid, and Salmiati Salmiati
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 317, Page 343
[457]
M. Plaza-Recobert, G. Trautwein, M. Pérez-Cadenas, and J. Alcañiz-Monge
Fuel Processing Technology, 2017, Volume 159, Page 345
[458]
Shuwen Wang, Zhipeng Wang, Ryusuke Futamura, Morinobu Endo, and Katsumi Kaneko
Chemical Physics Letters, 2017, Volume 673, Page 38
[459]
Fatima Pardo-Tarifa, Saúl Cabrera, Margarita Sanchez-Dominguez, and Magali Boutonnet
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, Volume 42, Number 15, Page 9754
[460]
Maxim S. Mel'gunov and Artem B. Ayupov
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 243, Page 147
[461]
M. Lammert, C. Glißmann, and N. Stock
Dalton Trans., 2017, Volume 46, Number 8, Page 2425
[462]
Maeva Borel, Mathias Dodin, T. Jean Daou, Nicolas Bats, Bogdan Harbuzaru, and Joël Patarin
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017, Volume 17, Number 3, Page 1173
[463]
Gelines Moreno-Fernandez, Mirko Kunowsky, Maria Ángeles Lillo-Ródenas, Joaquin Ibañez, and Jose M. Rojo
ChemElectroChem, 2017, Volume 4, Number 5, Page 1016
[464]
Ziyi Li, Yingshu Liu, Xiong Yang, Yi Xing, Quan Yang, and Ralph T. Yang
Adsorption, 2017, Volume 23, Number 2-3, Page 361
[465]
Jing Zhu, Wentao Mu, Liqing Su, Xingying Li, Yuyu Guo, Shen Zhang, and Zhe Li
Journal of Solid State Chemistry, 2017, Volume 248, Page 142
[466]
M. Plaza-Recobert, G. Trautwein, M. Pérez-Cadenas, and J. Alcañiz-Monge
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 243, Page 28
[467]
Milki Mae Durano, Ashif H. Tamboli, and Hern Kim
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2017, Volume 520, Page 355
[468]
Othman Charles S. Al Hamouz, Isaiah Olabisi Adelabu, and Tawfik A. Saleh
Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, Volume 192, Page 163
[469]
Zhimin Xue, Jingyun Jiang, Ming-Guo Ma, Ming-Fei Li, and Tiancheng Mu
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2017, Volume 5, Number 3, Page 2623
[470]
María P. Elizalde-González, Esmeralda García-Díaz, Mario González-Perea, and Jürgen Mattusch
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017, Volume 24, Number 9, Page 8164
[471]
Jianxi Zhu, Ke Wen, Ping Zhang, Yuebo Wang, Lingya Ma, Yunfei Xi, Runliang Zhu, Hongmei Liu, and Hongping He
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 242, Page 256
[472]
Lavinia Balan, María C. Fernández de Córdoba, Mohamed Zaier, and Conchi O. Ania
Carbon, 2017, Volume 116, Page 264
[473]
Armin Taheri, Ensieh Ganji Babakhani, and Jafar Towfighi
Adsorption Science & Technology, 2017, Page 026361741668869
[474]
Martin Lammert, Christian Glißmann, Helge Reinsch, and Norbert Stock
Crystal Growth & Design, 2017, Volume 17, Number 3, Page 1125
[476]
Subarna Dey, Asamanjoy Bhunia, Hergen Breitzke, Pedro B. Groszewicz, Gerd Buntkowsky, and Christoph Janiak
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 7, Page 3609
[477]
Alexandre A. S. Gonçalves, Patrícia B. Faustino, José M. Assaf, and Mietek Jaroniec
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 7, Page 6079
[478]
Ana Carolina Cunha Arantes, Crislaine das Graças Almeida, Ligiane Carolina Leite Dauzacker, Maria Lucia Bianchi, Delilah F. Wood, Tina G. Williams, William J. Orts, and Gustavo Henrique Denzin Tonoli
Carbohydrate Polymers, 2017, Volume 163, Page 101
[479]
Aled D. Roberts, Jet-Sing M. Lee, Siew Yee Wong, Xu Li, and Haifei Zhang
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 6, Page 2811
[480]
Juan Alcañiz-Monge, Guido Trautwein, Bouchra El Bakkali, and Santiago Reinoso
Chemistry - A European Journal, 2017, Volume 23, Number 10, Page 2387
[481]
Daria Kondrashova, Alexander Lauerer, Dirk Mehlhorn, Hervé Jobic, Armin Feldhoff, Matthias Thommes, Dipanjan Chakraborty, Cedric Gommes, Jovana Zecevic, Petra de Jongh, Armin Bunde, Jörg Kärger, and Rustem Valiullin
Scientific Reports, 2017, Volume 7, Page 40207
[482]
Yingjie Li, Qingnan Liu, Wenfeng Li, Hong Meng, Yingzhou Lu, and Chunxi Li
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, Volume 9, Number 4, Page 3895
[483]
Jiuqing Wen, Jun Xie, Rongchen Shen, Xin Li, XingYi Luo, Hongdan Zhang, Aiping Zhang, and Guican Bi
Dalton Trans., 2017, Volume 46, Number 6, Page 1794
[484]
Yanan Liu, Yang Liu, Woo Cheal Choi, Suhyeong Chae, Jinpyo Lee, Byoung-Suhk Kim, Mira Park, and Hak Yong Kim
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 6, Page 2664
[485]
Rosana V. Pinto, Fernando Antunes, João Pires, Vanessa Graça, Paula Brandão, and Moisés L. Pinto
Acta Biomaterialia, 2017, Volume 51, Page 66
[486]
Shanshan Zhao, Tingting Yan, Zhuo Wang, Jianping Zhang, Liyi Shi, and Dengsong Zhang
RSC Adv., 2017, Volume 7, Number 8, Page 4297
[487]
D. Barreda, A.M. Pérez-Mas, A. Silvestre-Albero, M.E. Casco, S. Rudić, C. Herdes, E.A. Müller, C. Blanco, R. Santamaria, J. Silvestre-Albero, and F. Rodríguez-Reinoso
Carbon, 2017, Volume 115, Page 539
[488]
Ellie H. Fini, Bjarke Høgsaa, Jesper de Claville Christiansen, Catalina-Gabriela Sanporean, Erik Appel Jensen, Masoumeh Mousavi, and Farideh Pahlavan
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017, Volume 121, Number 3, Page 1794
[489]
D. Majda, A. Bhattarai, J. Riikonen, B.D. Napruszewska, M. Zimowska, A. Michalik-Zym, J. Tӧyrӓs, and V.-P. Lehto
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 241, Page 238
[490]
Luigi Osmieri, Ricardo Escudero-Cid, Marco Armandi, Alessandro H.A. Monteverde Videla, José Luís García Fierro, Pilar Ocón, and Stefania Specchia
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017, Volume 205, Page 637
[491]
G.L. Dotto, J.M.N. Santos, E.H. Tanabe, D.A. Bertuol, E.L. Foletto, E.C. Lima, and F.A. Pavan
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, Volume 144, Page 120
[492]
Ingrid G. Ramos, Arão C. Viana, Edeilza L. dos Santos, Artur J.S. Mascarenhas, Antônio E.G. Sant'Ana, Henrique F. Goulart, Janice I. Druzian, and Heloysa M.C. Andrade
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 242, Page 99
[493]
Deepu J. Babu, Michael Bruns, Reinhard Schneider, Dagmar Gerthsen, and Jörg J. Schneider
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2017, Volume 121, Number 1, Page 616
[494]
Jann Lippke, Birte Brosent, Tobias von Zons, Erika Virmani, Sebastian Lilienthal, Thomas Preuße, Miriam Hülsmann, Andreas M. Schneider, Stefan Wuttke, Peter Behrens, and Adelheid Godt
Inorganic Chemistry, 2017, Volume 56, Number 2, Page 748
[495]
Luís Mafra, Tomaž Čendak, Sarah Schneider, Paul V. Wiper, João Pires, José R. B. Gomes, and Moisés L. Pinto
Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2017, Volume 139, Number 1, Page 389
[496]
Armin Taheri, Ensieh Ganji Babakhani, and Jafar Towfighi
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2017, Volume 38, Page 272
[497]
Toshihiro Isobe, Yuka Arai, Sayaka Yanagida, Sachiko Matsushita, and Akira Nakajima
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 241, Page 218
[498]
Beata Jabłońska, Andriy V. Kityk, Mark Busch, and Patrick Huber
Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, Volume 190, Page 80
[499]
Shaolei Wang, Kunpeng Song, Chengxin Zhang, Yu Shu, Tao Li, and Bien Tan
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 4, Page 1509
[500]
Tatsumasa Hiratsuka, Hideki Tanaka, and Minoru T. Miyahara
ACS Nano, 2017, Volume 11, Number 1, Page 269
[501]
Bing Xue, Lei Hui, Huaqin Yang, Yulai Zhao, Linxi Hou, and Wei Li
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2017, Volume 56, Number 1, Page 135
[502]
Glaydson S. dos Reis, Matthew A. Adebayo, Carlos H. Sampaio, Eder C. Lima, Pascal S. Thue, Irineu A. S. de Brum, Silvio L. P. Dias, and Flavio A. Pavan
Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 2017, Volume 228, Number 1
[504]
Zhikang He, Junwei Fu, Bei Cheng, Jiaguo Yu, and Shaowen Cao
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017, Volume 205, Page 104
[505]
Belgin Bozbiyik, Tom Van Assche, Jeroen Lannoeye, Dirk E. De Vos, Gino V. Baron, and Joeri F. M. Denayer
Adsorption, 2017, Volume 23, Number 1, Page 185
[506]
Qingze Chen, Runliang Zhu, Lingya Ma, Qing Zhou, Jianxi Zhu, and Hongping He
Applied Clay Science, 2017, Volume 135, Page 129
[507]
Jianlong Ge, Jichao Zhang, Fei Wang, Zhaoling Li, Jianyong Yu, and Bin Ding
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 2, Page 497
[508]
Kan Jin, Yuanping Cheng, Qingquan Liu, Wei Zhao, Liang Wang, Fei Wang, and Dongmei Wu
Energy & Fuels, 2016, Volume 30, Number 12, Page 10383
[509]
Subarna Dey, Asamanjoy Bhunia, Ishtvan Boldog, and Christoph Janiak
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 241, Page 303
[510]
M.A. Goula, N.D. Charisiou, K.N. Papageridis, and G. Siakavelas
Chinese Journal of Catalysis, 2016, Volume 37, Number 11, Page 1949
[511]
Junpei Yue, Christian Suchomski, Pascal Voepel, Ruediger Ellinghaus, Marcus Rohnke, Thomas Leichtweiss, Matthias T. Elm, and Bernd M. Smarsly
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 5, Page 1978
[512]
Yanping Zhu, Minwang Laipan, Runliang Zhu, Tianyuan Xu, Jing Liu, Jianxi Zhu, Yunfei Xi, Gangqiang Zhu, and Hongping He
Molecular Catalysis, 2017, Volume 427, Page 54
[513]
Marie Shimomura, Masayuki Yoshida, and Akira Endo
Adsorption, 2017, Volume 23, Number 2-3, Page 249
[514]
Marco Zeiger, Teguh Ariyanto, Benjamin Krüner, Nicolas J. Peter, Simon Fleischmann, Bastian J. M. Etzold, and Volker Presser
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 48, Page 18899
[515]
Lakshitha Pahalagedara, David A. Kriz, Niluka Wasalathanthri, Chandima Weerakkody, Yongtao Meng, Shanka Dissanayake, Madhavi Pahalagedara, Zhu Luo, Steven L. Suib, Partha Nandi, and Randall J. Meyer
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2017, Volume 204, Page 411
[516]
Nicolas Jäckel, Patrice Simon, Yury Gogotsi, and Volker Presser
ACS Energy Letters, 2016, Volume 1, Number 6, Page 1262
[517]
Arnaud Gigot, Marco Fontana, Mara Serrapede, Micaela Castellino, Stefano Bianco, Marco Armandi, Barbara Bonelli, Candido Fabrizio Pirri, Elena Tresso, and Paola Rivolo
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2016, Volume 8, Number 48, Page 32842
[518]
Martijn F. de Lange, Li-Chiang Lin, Jorge Gascon, Thijs J. H. Vlugt, and Freek Kapteijn
Langmuir, 2016, Volume 32, Number 48, Page 12664
[519]
C. Weinberger, X. Cao, and M. Tiemann
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 47, Page 18426
[520]
Muayad Esaifan, Mohammed Hourani, Hani Khoury, Hubert Rahier, and Jan Wastiels
Advanced Powder Technology, 2017, Volume 28, Number 2, Page 473
[521]
Lijun Wu, Junwei Lang, Peng Zhang, Xu Zhang, Ruisheng Guo, and Xingbin Yan
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 47, Page 18392
[522]
Chunsheng Lei, Meng Pi, Chuanjia Jiang, Bei Cheng, and Jiaguo Yu
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2017, Volume 490, Page 242
[523]
M. Lammert, H. Reinsch, C. A. Murray, M. T. Wharmby, H. Terraschke, and N. Stock
Dalton Trans., 2016, Volume 45, Number 47, Page 18822
[524]
Dimitrios A. Giannakoudakis, Mingyung Jiang, and Teresa J. Bandosz
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2016, Volume 8, Number 46, Page 31986
[525]
Jialiang Tang, Claudia Edith Zavala Lugo, Salvador Francisco Acuña Guzmán, Geoffrey Daniel, Vadim G. Kessler, Gulaim A. Seisenbaeva, and Vilas G. Pol
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 46, Page 18107
[526]
Ronan Behling, Gregory Chatel, and Sabine Valange
Ultrasonics Sonochemistry, 2017, Volume 36, Page 27
[527]
Mingzhi Wang, Qiulin Zhang, Tengfei Zhang, Yiru Wang, Jing Wang, Kaixian Long, Zhongxian Song, Xin Liu, and Ping Ning
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 313, Page 1370
[528]
Rafael Zarzuela, María Carbú, M.L. Almoraima Gil, Jesús M. Cantoral, and María J. Mosquera
Materials & Design, 2017, Volume 114, Page 364
[529]
M. Widmaier, B. Krüner, N. Jäckel, M. Aslan, S. Fleischmann, C. Engel, and V. Presser
Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 2016, Volume 163, Number 14, Page A2956
[531]
Hangbiao Hu, Tao Zhang, Shaojun Yuan, and Shengwei Tang
Adsorption, 2017, Volume 23, Number 1, Page 73
[532]
[533]
Sam Wouters, Tom Hauffman, Marjo C. Mittelmeijer-Hazeleger, Gadi Rothenberg, Gert Desmet, Gino V. Baron, and Sebastiaan Eeltink
Journal of Separation Science, 2016, Volume 39, Number 23, Page 4492
[534]
Qin Zhao, Caixia Wu, Lina Cong, Yuhang Zhang, Guiru Sun, Haiming Xie, Liqun Sun, and Jia Liu
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, Volume 5, Number 2, Page 544
[535]
Qi Xin, Antonella Glisenti, Constantine Philippopoulos, Evangelos Poulakis, Myrjam Mertens, Jeff Nyalosaso, Vera Meynen, and Pegie Cool
Catalysts, 2016, Volume 6, Number 10, Page 164
[536]
Grandprix T.M. Kadja, Verry A. Fabiani, Mirwan H. Aziz, Adroit T.N. Fajar, Anton Prasetyo, Veinardi Suendo, Eng-Poh Ng, and Rino R. Mukti
Advanced Powder Technology, 2017, Volume 28, Number 2, Page 443
[537]
Yan Xu, Liang Chang, and Yun Hang Hu
International Journal of Energy Research, 2017, Volume 41, Number 5, Page 728
[538]
Emil Ioan Muresan, Doina Lutic, Gabriela Lisa, and Aurel Pui
Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, 2017, Volume 81, Number 3, Page 934
[539]
Katie A. Cychosz, Rémy Guillet-Nicolas, Javier García-Martínez, and Matthias Thommes
Chem. Soc. Rev., 2017, Volume 46, Number 2, Page 389
[540]
Jowita Marszewska and Mietek Jaroniec
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2017, Volume 487, Page 162
[541]
Lucía M. Toscani, Aldo F. Craievich, Márcia C. A. Fantini, Diego G. Lamas, and Susana A. Larrondo
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2016, Volume 120, Number 42, Page 24165
[542]
Ulf Betke, Steven Proemmel, Stefan Rannabauer, Alexandra Lieb, Michael Scheffler, and Franziska Scheffler
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 239, Page 209
[543]
Jian-Cheng Geng, Ding-Ming Xue, Xiao-Qin Liu, Yao-Qi Shi, and Lin-Bing Sun
AIChE Journal, 2017, Volume 63, Number 5, Page 1648
[544]
C. Sámano-Alonso, René Cabrera, J. Hernández-Obregón, A.A. Lemus-Santana, and E. Reguera
Surfaces and Interfaces, 2016, Volume 5, Page 55
[545]
Michal Marszewski, Jowita Marszewska, Svitlana Pylypenko, and Mietek Jaroniec
Chemistry of Materials, 2016, Volume 28, Number 21, Page 7878
[546]
[547]
[548]
Erik Troschke, Sven Grätz, Lars Borchardt, Danny Haubold, Irena Senkovska, Alexander Eychmueller, and Stefan Kaskel
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 239, Page 190
[549]
João Pires, Joana Fernandes, Ana C. Fernandes, and Moisés Pinto
Separation Science and Technology, 2017, Volume 52, Number 1, Page 51
[550]
Sujoy Bandyopadhyay, Amith G. Anil, Anto James, and Abhijit Patra
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2016, Volume 8, Number 41, Page 27669
[551]
Ana C. Fernandes and João Pires
Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data, 2016, Volume 61, Number 11, Page 3890
[552]
Alexander F. R. Kilpatrick, Jean-Charles Buffet, Peter Nørby, Nicholas H. Rees, Nicholas P. Funnell, Saovalak Sripothongnak, and Dermot O’Hare
Chemistry of Materials, 2016, Volume 28, Number 20, Page 7444
[553]
Peng Liu, Hongping He, Gaoling Wei, Dong Liu, Xiaoliang Liang, Tianhu Chen, Jianxi Zhu, and Runliang Zhu
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 239, Page 101
[554]
D. Zabiegaj, M.T. Buscaglia, D. Giuranno, L. Liggieri, and F. Ravera
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 239, Page 45
[555]
Piotr Kowalczyk, Piotr A. Gauden, Sylwester Furmaniak, Artur P. Terzyk, Marek Wiśniewski, Anna Ilnicka, Jerzy Łukaszewicz, Andrzej Burian, Jerzy Włoch, and Alexander V. Neimark
Carbon, 2017, Volume 111, Page 358
[556]
D.A. Sánchez-Téllez, L. Téllez-Jurado, L.M. Rodríguez-Lorenzo, M.A. Mazo, J. Rubio, and A. Tamayo
Ceramics International, 2017, Volume 43, Number 1, Page 476
[557]
Natalita M. Nursam, Jeannie Z. Y. Tan, Xingdong Wang, Wei Li, Fang Xia, and Rachel A. Caruso
ChemistrySelect, 2016, Volume 1, Number 15, Page 4868
[558]
Yongheng Yin, Zhen Li, Xin Yang, Li Cao, Chongbin Wang, Bei Zhang, Hong Wu, and Zhongyi Jiang
Journal of Power Sources, 2016, Volume 332, Page 265
[559]
Rana Dalapati, Balasubramanian Sakthivel, Amarajothi Dhakshinamoorthy, Amlan Buragohain, Asamanjoy Bhunia, Christoph Janiak, and Shyam Biswas
CrystEngComm, 2016, Volume 18, Number 40, Page 7855
[560]
E.S. Sanz-Pérez, T.C.M. Dantas, A. Arencibia, G. Calleja, A.P.M.A. Guedes, A.S. Araujo, and R. Sanz
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, Volume 308, Page 1021
[561]
Natsume Koike, Watcharop Chaikittisilp, Atsushi Shimojima, and Tatsuya Okubo
RSC Adv., 2016, Volume 6, Number 93, Page 90435
[562]
M.R. Carrasco-Díaz, E. Castillejos-López, A. Cerpa-Naranjo, and M.L. Rojas-Cervantes
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2017, Volume 237, Page 282
[563]
Melina C. Castrillon, Karine O. Moura, Caiuã A. Alves, Moises Bastos-Neto, Diana C. S. Azevedo, Jörg Hofmann, Jens Möllmer, Wolf-Dietrich Einicke, and Roger Gläser
Energy & Fuels, 2016, Volume 30, Number 11, Page 9596
[564]
Ashlee J. Howarth, Aaron W. Peters, Nicolaas A. Vermeulen, Timothy C. Wang, Joseph T. Hupp, and Omar K. Farha
Chemistry of Materials, 2017, Volume 29, Number 1, Page 26
[565]
Chong Luo, Shuzhang Niu, Guangmin Zhou, Wei Lv, Baohua Li, Feiyu Kang, and Quan-Hong Yang
Chem. Commun., 2016, Volume 52, Number 82, Page 12143
[566]
Jet-Sing M. Lee, Michael E. Briggs, Tom Hasell, and Andrew I. Cooper
Advanced Materials, 2016, Volume 28, Number 44, Page 9804
[567]
W. Huybrechts, G. Mali, P. Kuśtrowski, T. Willhammar, M. Mertens, S. Bals, P. Van Der Voort, and P. Cool
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2016, Volume 236, Page 244
[568]
Glauco F. Leal, Silvia F. Moya, Debora M. Meira, Dean H. Barrett, Erico Teixeira-Neto, Antonio Aprígio S. Curvelo, Victor Teixeira da Silva, and Cristiane B. Rodella
RSC Adv., 2016, Volume 6, Number 90, Page 87756
[569]
Martin von der Lehr, Christopher F. Seidler, Dereje H. Taffa, Michael Wark, Bernd M. Smarsly, and Roland Marschall
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2016, Volume 8, Number 38, Page 25476
[570]
Babak Ashourirad, Pezhman Arab, Timur Islamoglu, Katie A. Cychosz, Matthias Thommes, and Hani M. El-Kaderi
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 38, Page 14693
[571]
Mizuho Yabushita, Peng Li, Hirokazu Kobayashi, Atsushi Fukuoka, Omar K. Farha, and Alexander Katz
Chem. Commun., 2016, Volume 52, Number 79, Page 11791
[572]
S. Waitschat, H. Reinsch, and N. Stock
Chem. Commun., 2016, Volume 52, Number 86, Page 12698
[573]
D. Godinho, D. Dias, M. Bernardo, N. Lapa, I. Fonseca, H. Lopes, and F. Pinto
Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2017, Volume 321, Page 173
[574]
Deepu J. Babu, Tim Herdt, Sherif Okeil, Michael Bruns, Reiner Staudt, and Jörg J. Schneider
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 37, Page 14267
[575]
Michele M. Lynch, Jichuan Liu, Michael Nigra, and Marc-Olivier Coppens
Langmuir, 2016, Volume 32, Number 37, Page 9604
[576]
Ruohong Sui, Kevin L. Lesage, Sarah K. Carefoot, Tobias Fürstenhaupt, Chelsea J. Rose, and Robert A. Marriott
Langmuir, 2016, Volume 32, Number 36, Page 9197
[577]
J. Busom, A. Schreiber, A. Tolosa, N. Jäckel, I. Grobelsek, N.J. Peter, and V. Presser
Journal of Power Sources, 2016, Volume 329, Page 432
[578]
Hui Yang, Siobhan J. Bradley, Andrew Chan, Geoffrey I. N. Waterhouse, Thomas Nann, Paul E. Kruger, and Shane G. Telfer
Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2016, Volume 138, Number 36, Page 11872
[579]
Felix H. Richter, Laila Sahraoui, and Ferdi Schüth
Chemistry - A European Journal, 2016, Volume 22, Number 38, Page 13563
[580]
David Eisenberg, Pepijn Prinsen, Norbert J. Geels, Wowa Stroek, Ning Yan, Bin Hua, Jing-Li Luo, and Gadi Rothenberg
RSC Adv., 2016, Volume 6, Number 84, Page 80398
[581]
Eisuke Yamamoto and Kazuyuki Kuroda
Bulletin of the Chemical Society of Japan, 2016, Volume 89, Number 5, Page 501
[582]
Arash Arami-Niya, Thomas E. Rufford, and Zhonghua Zhu
Energy & Fuels, 2016, Volume 30, Number 9, Page 7298
[583]
Anna N. Matveyeva, Nikolai A. Pakhomov, and Dmitry Yu. Murzin
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2016, Volume 55, Number 34, Page 9101
[584]
Jie-Feng Zhu, Jie Wang, Jian-Zhong Liu, Jun Cheng, Zhi-Hua Wang, Jun-Hu Zhou, and Ke-Fa Cen
Energy & Fuels, 2016, Volume 30, Number 9, Page 7158
[585]
N. Zucchetto and D. Brühwiler
Dalton Trans., 2016, Volume 45, Number 36, Page 14363
[586]
Francine Bertella, Patricia Concepción, and Agustín Martínez
Catalysis Today, 2017, Volume 289, Page 181
[587]
K. Brousse, P. Huang, S. Pinaud, M. Respaud, B. Daffos, B. Chaudret, C. Lethien, P.L. Taberna, and P. Simon
Journal of Power Sources, 2016, Volume 328, Page 520
[588]
Stanislav Kurajica, Iva Minga, Martina Guliš, Vilko Mandić, and Ivan Simčić
Journal of Nanomaterials, 2016, Volume 2016, Page 1
[589]
Stephan Bendt, Maximilian Hovestadt, Ulrike Böhme, Carolin Paula, Merle Döpken, Martin Hartmann, and Frerich J. Keil
European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry, 2016, Volume 2016, Number 27, Page 4440
[590]
Jun-Yue Shen, Lin Zhang, Juan Ren, Ji-Chao Wang, Hong-Chang Yao, and Zhong-Jun Li
Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2017, Volume 239, Page 597
[591]
G. L. Dotto, R. Ocampo-Pérez, J. M. Moura, T. R. S. Cadaval, and L. A. A. Pinto
Adsorption, 2016, Volume 22, Number 7, Page 973
[592]
Kai Wan, Zhi-peng Yu, Quan-bing Liu, Jin-hua Piao, Yu-ying Zheng, and Zhen-xing Liang
RSC Adv., 2016, Volume 6, Number 79, Page 75058
[593]
[594]
Ryan A. Adams, Arthur D. Dysart, Roberto Esparza, Salvador Acuña, Samrudhi R. Joshi, Aaron Cox, David Mulqueen, and Vilas G. Pol
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2016, Volume 55, Number 32, Page 8706
[595]
M. Airimioaei, R. Stanculescu, V. Preutu, C. Ciomaga, N. Horchidan, S. Tascu, D. Lutic, A. Pui, and L. Mitoseriu
Materials Chemistry and Physics, 2016, Volume 182, Page 246
[596]
Pierrick Gaudin, Philippe Fioux, Sophie Dorge, Habiba Nouali, Matthieu Vierling, Emmanuel Fiani, Michel Molière, Jean-François Brilhac, and Joël Patarin
Fuel Processing Technology, 2016, Volume 153, Page 129
[597]
J.A. Cecilia, E. Vilarrasa-García, C. García-Sancho, R.M.A. Saboya, D.C.S. Azevedo, C.L. Cavalcante, and E. Rodríguez-Castellón
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2016, Volume 52, Page 344
[598]
Wojciech Depczynski, Robert Kazala, Krzysztof Ludwinek, and Katarzyna Jedynak
Materials, 2016, Volume 9, Number 7, Page 567
[599]
Christoph Klumpen, Marion Breunig, Thomas Homburg, Norbert Stock, and Juergen Senker
Chemistry of Materials, 2016, Volume 28, Number 15, Page 5461
[600]
Hangjia Shen, Danfeng Qin, Yuzhen Li, Shouzhu Li, Chi Yang, Qunhui Yuan, Thomas Wagberg, and Guangzhi Hu
Electroanalysis, 2016, Volume 28, Number 12, Page 2939
[601]
Christian Balzer, Richard T. Cimino, Gennady Y. Gor, Alexander V. Neimark, and Gudrun Reichenauer
Langmuir, 2016, Volume 32, Number 32, Page 8265
[602]
Shanshan Zhao, Tingting Yan, Hui Wang, Jianping Zhang, Liyi Shi, and Dengsong Zhang
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2016, Volume 8, Number 28, Page 18027
[603]
Zhimin Xue, Bobo Cao, Wancheng Zhao, Jinfang Wang, Tingting Yu, and Tiancheng Mu
RSC Adv., 2016, Volume 6, Number 69, Page 64338
[604]
Franziska Drache, Volodymyr Bon, Irena Senkovska, Claudia Marschelke, Alla Synytska, and Stefan Kaskel
Inorganic Chemistry, 2016, Volume 55, Number 15, Page 7206
[605]
L.A. Cano, A.A. Garcia Blanco, G. Lener, S.G. Marchetti, and K. Sapag
Catalysis Today, 2017, Volume 282, Page 204
[606]
Anas Tahli, Reda F.M. Elshaarawy, Ümit Köc, Anna Christin Kautz, and Christoph Janiak
Polyhedron, 2016, Volume 117, Page 579
[608]
Nasser Khazeni, Reza Foudazi, and Abbas Ghassemi
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2016, Volume 304, Page 369
[609]
Christine E. A. Kirschhock, Michiel De Prins, Elke Verheijen, Andrey Ryzhikov, T. Jean Daou, Habiba Nouali, Francis Taulelle, Johan A. Martens, and Joël Patarin
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2016, Volume 18, Number 28, Page 18795
[610]
Luigi Osmieri, Alessandro H.A. Monteverde Videla, Marco Armandi, and Stefania Specchia
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2016, Volume 41, Number 47, Page 22570
[611]
M.M.L. Ribeiro Carrott, I.P.P. Cansado, P.J.M. Carrott, P.A. Russo, P. Castilho, C. Fernandes, C. Catrinescu, and C. Breen
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2016, Volume 232, Page 238
[612]
S. Wang, R. Futamura, and K. Kaneko
Adsorption, 2016, Volume 22, Number 8, Page 1035
[613]
Luisa Prasetyo, Toshihide Horikawa, Poomiwat Phadungbut, Shiliang (Johnathan) Tan, D.D. Do, and D. Nicholson
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2016, Volume 478, Page 402
[614]
Deepak P. Dubal, Y. P. Wu, and R. Holze
ChemTexts, 2016, Volume 2, Number 3
[615]
Huang Liu, Yanhua Zhang, Hongtao Yang, Wei Xiao, and Lanlan Sun
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2016, Volume 2016, Page 1
[616]
Rui S. Ribeiro, Zacharias Frontistis, Dionissios Mantzavinos, Danae Venieri, Maria Antonopoulou, Ioannis Konstantinou, Adrián M.T. Silva, Joaquim L. Faria, and Helder T. Gomes
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2016, Volume 199, Page 170
[617]
Huan Li, Ying Tao, Xiaoyu Zheng, Jiayan Luo, Feiyu Kang, Hui-Ming Cheng, and Quan-Hong Yang
Energy Environ. Sci., 2016, Volume 9, Number 10, Page 3135
[618]
M. Bernardo, S. Rodrigues, N. Lapa, I. Matos, F. Lemos, M. K. S. Batista, A. P. Carvalho, and I. Fonseca
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 2016, Volume 13, Number 8, Page 1989
[619]
Jonas Pampel, Caleb Denton, and Tim-Patrick Fellinger
Carbon, 2016, Volume 107, Page 288
[620]
Yu.V. Vatutina, O.V. Klimov, K.A. Nadeina, I.G. Danilova, E.Yu. Gerasimov, I.P. Prosvirin, and A.S. Noskov
Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2016, Volume 199, Page 23
[621]
Rui S. Ribeiro, Adrián M.T. Silva, Pedro B. Tavares, José L. Figueiredo, Joaquim L. Faria, and Helder T. Gomes
Catalysis Today, 2017, Volume 280, Page 184
[622]
Sandeep Kumar Dey, Nader de Sousa Amadeu, and Christoph Janiak
Chem. Commun., 2016, Volume 52, Number 50, Page 7834
[623]
Jerzy Choma, Lukasz Osuchowski, Michal Marszewski, Aleksandra Dziura, and Mietek Jaroniec
Journal of CO2 Utilization, 2016, Volume 16, Page 17
[624]
M. Salanne, B. Rotenberg, K. Naoi, K. Kaneko, P.-L. Taberna, C. P. Grey, B. Dunn, and P. Simon
Nature Energy, 2016, Volume 1, Number 6, Page 16070
[625]
Georgios N. Kalantzopoulos, Myrsini K. Antoniou, Apostolos Enotiadis, Konstantinos Dimos, Enrico Maccallini, Alfonso Policicchio, Elio Colavita, and Raffaele G. Agostino
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 23, Page 9275
[626]
E. Febriyanti, V. Suendo, R. R. Mukti, A. Prasetyo, A. F. Arifin, M. A. Akbar, S. Triwahyono, I. N. Marsih, and Ismunandar
Langmuir, 2016, Volume 32, Number 23, Page 5802
[627]
N. López-Salas, D. Carriazo, M. C. Gutiérrez, M. L. Ferrer, C. O. Ania, F. Rubio, A. Tamayo, J. L. G. Fierro, and F. del Monte
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 23, Page 9146
[628]
Jeffrey Kenvin, Sharon Mitchell, Michael Sterling, Robbie Warringham, Tobias C. Keller, Paolo Crivelli, Jacek Jagiello, and Javier Pérez-Ramírez
Advanced Functional Materials, 2016, Volume 26, Number 31, Page 5621
[629]
Mirian E. Casco, Fernando Rey, José L. Jordá, Svemir Rudić, François Fauth, Manuel Martínez-Escandell, Francisco Rodríguez-Reinoso, Enrique V. Ramos-Fernández, and Joaquín Silvestre-Albero
Chem. Sci., 2016, Volume 7, Number 6, Page 3658
[630]
Markus Klose, Romy Reinhold, Katja Pinkert, Martin Uhlemann, Florian Wolke, Juan Balach, Tony Jaumann, Ulrich Stoeck, Jürgen Eckert, and Lars Giebeler
Carbon, 2016, Volume 106, Page 306
[631]
Mizuho Yabushita, Peng Li, Varinia Bernales, Hirokazu Kobayashi, Atsushi Fukuoka, Laura Gagliardi, Omar K. Farha, and Alexander Katz
Chem. Commun., 2016, Volume 52, Number 44, Page 7094
[632]
Robert A. Burrow, Giancarlo Z. Belmonte, Viviana Dorn, and Mariana Dennehy
Inorganica Chimica Acta, 2016, Volume 450, Page 39
[633]
Balázs Nagy, Silvia Villar-Rodil, Juan M.D. Tascón, István Bakos, and Krisztina László
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2016, Volume 230, Page 135
[634]
Paloma Vinaches, José Antônio B.L.R. Alves, Dulce M.A. Melo, and Sibele B.C. Pergher
Materials Letters, 2016, Volume 178, Page 217
[635]
Tatsumasa Hiratsuka, Hideki Tanaka, and Minoru T. Miyahara
The Journal of Chemical Physics, 2016, Volume 144, Number 16, Page 164705
[636]
Subarna Dey, Asamanjoy Bhunia, Dolores Esquivel, and Christoph Janiak
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, Volume 4, Number 17, Page 6259
[637]
Carlos Macías, Gloria Rasines, Pedro Lavela, María C. Zafra, José L. Tirado, and Conchi O. Ania
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2016, Volume 4, Number 5, Page 2487
[638]
Simon Fleischmann, Nicolas Jäckel, Marco Zeiger, Benjamin Krüner, Ingrid Grobelsek, Petr Formanek, Soumyadip Choudhury, Daniel Weingarth, and Volker Presser
Chemistry of Materials, 2016, Volume 28, Number 8, Page 2802
[639]
Simon Krause, Volodymyr Bon, Irena Senkovska, Ulrich Stoeck, Dirk Wallacher, Daniel M. Többens, Stefan Zander, Renjith S. Pillai, Guillaume Maurin, François-Xavier Coudert, and Stefan Kaskel
Nature, 2016, Volume 532, Number 7599, Page 348
[641]
Rémy Guillet-Nicolas, Riaz Ahmad, Katie A. Cychosz, Freddy Kleitz, and Matthias Thommes
New J. Chem., 2016, Volume 40, Number 5, Page 4351
[642]
N. Jäckel, M. Rodner, A. Schreiber, J. Jeongwook, M. Zeiger, M. Aslan, D. Weingarth, and V. Presser
Journal of Power Sources, 2016, Volume 326, Page 660
[643]
Carlos Avendano, Nicolas Brun, Eléonore Mourad, Olivier Fontaine, Christine Labrugère Sarroste, Mohamed Baccour, Martin In, Ahmad Mehdi, Antonio Stocco, and André Vioux
New J. Chem., 2016, Volume 40, Number 5, Page 4344
[644]
Victoria Flexer, Bogdan C. Donose, Camille Lefebvre, Guillermo Pozo, Matthieu N. Boone, Luc Van Hoorebeke, Mohamed Baccour, Laurent Bonnet, Sylvie Calas-Etienne, Anne Galarneau, Magdalena M. Titirici, and Nicolas Brun
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2016, Volume 4, Number 5, Page 2508
[645]
Xinyuan Chong, Ki-Joong Kim, Erwen Li, Yujing Zhang, Paul R. Ohodnicki, Chih-Hung Chang, and Alan X. Wang
Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2016, Volume 232, Page 43
[647]
Qiuwei Shi, Chengyi Hou, Hongzhi Wang, Qinghong Zhang, and Yaogang Li
Chem. Commun., 2016, Volume 52, Number 34, Page 5816
[648]
A. Busch, P. Bertier, Y. Gensterblum, G. Rother, C. J. Spiers, M. Zhang, and H. M. Wentinck
Geomechanics and Geophysics for Geo-Energy and Geo-Resources, 2016, Volume 2, Number 2, Page 111
[649]
Gennady Y. Gor and Noam Bernstein
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2016, Volume 18, Number 14, Page 9788
[650]
Ethan M. Susca, Peter A. Beaucage, Margaret A. Hanson, Ulrike Werner-Zwanziger, Josef W. Zwanziger, Lara A. Estroff, and Ulrich Wiesner
Chemistry of Materials, 2016, Volume 28, Number 7, Page 2131
[651]
Alessandro Melicchio, Paola F. Liguori, Beatrice Russo, and Giovanni Golemme
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2016, Volume 41, Number 13, Page 5733
[652]
Albrecht Petzold, Anika Juhl, Jonas Scholz, Boris Ufer, Günter Goerigk, Michael Fröba, Matthias Ballauff, and Simone Mascotto
Langmuir, 2016, Volume 32, Number 11, Page 2780
[653]
Alicia Gomis-Berenguer, Mykola Seredych, Jesus Iniesta, Joao C. Lima, Teresa J. Bandosz, and Conchi O. Ania
Carbon, 2016, Volume 104, Page 253
[654]
Piotr Kowalczyk, Christian Balzer, Gudrun Reichenauer, Artur P. Terzyk, Piotr A. Gauden, and Alexander V. Neimark
Carbon, 2016, Volume 103, Page 263
[655]
Pierrick Gaudin, Laure Michelin, Ludovic Josien, Habiba Nouali, Sophie Dorge, Jean-François Brilhac, Emmanuel Fiani, Matthieu Vierling, Michel Molière, and Joël Patarin
Fuel Processing Technology, 2016, Volume 148, Page 1
[656]
G. V. Nunell, M. E. Fernandez, P. R. Bonelli, and A. L. Cukierman
Adsorption, 2016, Volume 22, Number 3, Page 347
[657]
Fethi Kooli, Yan Liu, Kais Hbaieb, and Rawan Al-Faze
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2016, Volume 226, Page 482
[658]
Carlos Macias, Gloria Rasines, Tomas García, María Zafra, Pedro Lavela, José Tirado, and Conchi Ania
Gels, 2016, Volume 2, Number 1, Page 4
[659]
J.A.F.L. Gomes, B.A. Azaruja, and P.A.M. Mourão
Applied Surface Science, 2016, Volume 380, Page 119
[660]
Ihab Kabalan, Benedicte Lebeau, Habiba Nouali, Joumana Toufaily, Tayssir Hamieh, Bachar Koubaissy, Jean-Pierre Bellat, and T. Jean Daou
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2016, Volume 120, Number 5, Page 2688
[661]
Masaru Ogura, Remy Guillet-Nicolas, Dalil Brouri, Sandra Casale, Juliette Blanchard, Katie A. Cychosz, Matthias Thommes, and Cyril Thomas
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2016, Volume 225, Page 440
[662]
Masayasu Nishi, Takahiro Ohkubo, Koki Urita, Isamu Moriguchi, and Yasushige Kuroda
Langmuir, 2016, Volume 32, Number 4, Page 1058
[663]
Kai Schute, Yannik Louven, Chaline Detoni, and Marcus Rose
Chemie Ingenieur Technik, 2016, Volume 88, Number 3, Page 355
[664]
Hengfei Qin, Shifei Kang, Yangang Wang, Huan Liu, Zhijiang Ni, Yongkui Huang, Yaguang Li, and Xi Li
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2016, Volume 4, Number 3, Page 1240
[665]
B.A. García-Torres, A. Aguilar-Elguezabal, M. Román-Aguirre, and L. Álvarez-Contreras
Materials Chemistry and Physics, 2016, Volume 172, Page 32
[666]
Michael Sartor, Timo Stein, Frank Hoffmann, and Michael Fröba
Chemistry of Materials, 2016, Volume 28, Number 2, Page 519
[667]
Yuebo Wang, Ping Zhang, Ke Wen, Xiaoli Su, Jianxi Zhu, and Hongping He
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2016, Volume 224, Page 285
[668]
Sumbul Rahman, Sneha Shah, Chianjit Santra, Debasis Sen, Sadanand Sharma, J.K. Pandey, S. Mazumder, and Biswajit Chowdhury
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2016, Volume 226, Page 169
[669]
Kun Yan, Ling-Bin Kong, Kui-Wen Shen, Yan-Hua Dai, Ming Shi, Bing Hu, Yong-Chun Luo, and Long Kang
Applied Surface Science, 2016, Volume 364, Page 850
[670]
Diego A. Gómez-Gualdrón, Peyman Z. Moghadam, Joseph T. Hupp, Omar K. Farha, and Randall Q. Snurr
Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2016, Volume 138, Number 1, Page 215
[671]
Paul J. Dauenhauer
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2015, Volume 119, Number 52, Page 29203
[672]
E. S. Sanz-Pérez, A. Arencibia, R. Sanz, and G. Calleja
RSC Adv., 2015, Volume 5, Number 125, Page 103147
[673]
Marta Nunes, Inês M. Rocha, Diana M. Fernandes, Ana S. Mestre, Cosme N. Moura, Ana P. Carvalho, Manuel F. R. Pereira, and Cristina Freire
RSC Adv., 2015, Volume 5, Number 124, Page 102919
[674]
Ana S. Mestre, André Nabiço, Patrick L. Figueiredo, Moisés L. Pinto, M. Soledade C.S. Santos, and Isabel M. Fonseca
Chemical Engineering Journal, 2016, Volume 286, Page 538
[675]
Jean Rouquerol, Françoise Rouquerol, Phillip Llewellyn, and Renaud Denoyel
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2016, Volume 496, Page 3

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in