Reaction and Deactivation Rates of Methane Catalytic Cracking over Nickel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The kinetics of methane catalytic cracking over nickel supported on porous and nonporous aluminas was modeled using a separable kinetics approach in order to develop initial rate and activity decay equations. The model parameters were estimated using a set of experiments conducted in an electrobalance. The experimental work covered the 500–650 °C temperature range, using pure methane, as well as different partial pressures of CH 4 /N 2 and CH 4 /H 2 mixtures at atmospheric pressure. The model results showed a good match with the experimental data, and the estimated kinetic parameters agreed well with those reported in the literature. The morphology of the support affected the initial reaction rate and catalyst deactivation. The methane cracking activation energy was estimated to be 88 and 75 kJ/mol for the porous and nonporous catalysts, respectively. The activation energy for the encapsulating carbon formation was estimated to be 147 and 149 kJ/mol for the porous and nonporous catalysts, respectively. The deactivation reaction was found to be half-order in surface carbon. The model was expanded to include cracking/regeneration cycles. The model showed good agreement with the experimental data at different experimental conditions and up to 39 cycles. Cracking/regeneration cycles suggest that the porous catalyst can be used for conducting continuous methane cracking.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".