Kinetic and catalytic performance of a BI‐porous composite material in catalytic cracking and isomerisation reactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Catalytic behaviour of pure zeolite ZSM‐5 and a bi‐porous composite material (BCM) were investigated in transformation of m‐xylene, while zeolite HY and the bi‐porous composite were used in the cracking of 1,3,5‐triisopropylbenzene (TIPB). The micro/mesoporous material was used to understand the effect of the presence of mesopores on these reactions. Various characterisation techniques, that is, XRD, SEM, TGA, FT‐IR and nitrogen sorption measurements were applied for complete characterisation of the catalysts. Catalytic tests using CREC riser simulator showed that the micro/mesoporous composite catalyst exhibited higher catalytic activity as compared with the conventional microporous ZSM‐5 and HY zeolite for transformation of m‐xylene and for the catalytic cracking of TIPB, respectively. The outstanding catalytic reactivity of m‐xylene and TIPB molecules were mainly attributed to the easier access of active sites provided by the mesopores. Apparent activation energies for the disappearance of m‐xylene and TIPB over all catalysts were found to decrease in the order: E BCM > E ZSM‐5 and E BCM > E HY , respectively. © 2012 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".