Bimetallic Bi‐Ni oxides over carbide supports for oxidative dehydrogenation of <i>n</i>‐butane: Experimental and kinetic modelling
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract n ‐butane oxidative dehydrogenation was studied over Bi‐Ni/TiC, Bi‐Ni/SiC, Bi‐Ni/Silicalite‐1, and unsupported Bi‐Ni catalyst. The co‐impregnation technique was followed, with fixed 0.30 and 0.20 g/g for Bi and Ni respectively. The physico‐chemical properties were measured by means of BET, XRD, CO 2 /NH 3 ‐TPD, and H 2 ‐TPR techniques. The catalytic test results revealed that bimetallic Bi‐Ni/TiC catalyst exhibited the highest n ‐butane conversion of 16.6 % with dehydrogenation selectivity of 83.7 % (1,3‐butadiene and butenes selectivity of 50.7 % and 33 % respectively). As regards Bi‐Ni/TiC catalyst, the main operating parameters including O 2 /n‐C 4 H 10 feed ratio, space velocity, and reaction temperature were varied. The Bi‐Ni/TiC catalyst showed adequate stability for a 10 h time on stream test. The high performance of Bi‐Ni‐O/TiC catalyst is attributed to the synergistic role of reducibility, presence of strong basic sites and weak acidic sites, and an increased metal species dispersion over the TiC support. A kinetic study of n ‐butane oxidative dehydrogenation was carried out. The apparent activation energy for formation of butadiene was estimated to be the lowest (15 kJ/mol), while the highest activation energy (105 kJ/mol) is required for the undesirable cracking reaction.
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.
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 it