Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39358431›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Nanoporous Metatitanic acid on γ-Al

Abolfazl Shokri, Shahrokh Shahhosseini, Amin Bazyari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Abolfazl ShokriSchool of Chemical, Petroleum and Gas Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Shahrokh ShahhosseiniSchool of Chemical, Petroleum and Gas Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran. shahrokh@iust.ac.ir.
Amin BazyariSchool of Chemical, Petroleum and Gas Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carbon dioxide capture has become an important issue in reducing atmospheric heat these days. In this study, adsorption of carbon dioxide by aerogel Gamma Alumina-Metatitanic Acid has been investigated and optimized. Morphological and structural analyses such as BET, FESEM, FT-IR, and XRD have also been conducted. In addition, Response surface methodology has been applied in order to achieve the optimal conditions, using a five-level Central composite design. The highest amount of adsorption, 12.874 (mmol/g), was recorded at a temperature of 20 (°C), pressure of 7 (bar), and 25 (%wt) of Metatitanic Acid. This was approximately 11.46% and 4.84% higher than those of mesoporous MgO and 4Azeolite, respectively. Regeneration of the adsorbent was also studied at different temperatures and process durations. Metatitanic acid, as a catalyst, reduces the temperature and regeneration time of the adsorbent by creating active sites and surface hydroxyl groups. It also lowers the required activation energy and enhances the thermal conductivity of the composite material. The optimal result was achieved at a temperature of 100 (°C) and a duration of 30 (min). Finally, isothermal and thermodynamic experiments were conducted to establish the most accurate predictive model and conditions, including Enthalpy, Entropy, and Gibbs free energy. The results indicate that the Freundlich model aligned well with the laboratory findings. Additionally, the negative values of Enthalpy, Entropy, and Gibbs free energy suggested that the adsorption process was physical, exothermic, and spontaneous.

Indexed as

Adsorbent regenerationAerogel Gamma AluminaCO2 adsorptionMetatitanic acidOptimizationRSM

Identifiers

PMID39358431
PMCPMC11447002

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.