MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311532608 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24807

Comprehensive kinetic study for <scp>Fischer</scp> – <scp>Tropsch</scp> reaction over <scp>KMoFe</scp> / <scp>CNTs</scp> nano‐structured catalyst

2022· article· en· W4311532608 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Arash Yahyazadeh, Philip Boahene, Tolu Emiola‐Sadiq, Ajay K. Dalai, Lifeng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFischer–Tropsch processCatalysisX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyAdsorptionSyngasChemistryActivation energyXANESSpace velocityCarbon nanotubeExtended X-ray absorption fine structureChemical engineeringCarbon monoxideMaterials sciencePhysical chemistryAbsorption spectroscopySpectroscopyNanotechnologySelectivityOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The kinetics of the Fischer–Tropsch (FT) reaction was evaluated through detailed experimentation with a KMo bimetallic promoted Fe catalyst supported on carbon nanotubes (CNTs). The kinetic tests were conducted in a fixed‐bed reactor under operating conditions of P = 6.9–41.3 bar, T = 543–563 K, H 2 /CO = 1, gas hourly specific velocity (GHSV) = 2000 h −1 . This study aimed to investigate the mechanism prevailing in CO activation and the rate equation for CO consumption during FT reactions over a 0.5K5Mo10Fe/CNTs catalyst. To evaluate the synergistic effects of Fe, Mo, and K phases on the catalyst activity, both fresh and spent catalysts were thoroughly characterized using X‐ray diffraction (XRD), X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), scanning electron microscopy and energy‐dispersive spectroscopy (SEM‐EDS), X‐ray absorption near edge structure (XANES), and extended X‐ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) to ascertain the different phases (active sites) present and relevant interactions. Based on the adsorption of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, 22 possible mechanisms for monomer formation were proposed for FT synthesis in accordance with the Langmuir–Hinshelwood–Hougen–Watson (LHHW) and Eley–Rideal (ER) adsorption theories. The best fit kinetic model was identified through a multi‐variable non‐linear regression analysis. The selected mechanistic model was based on carbide formation approach, where H 2 ‐assisted adsorption of CO was considered for the derivation. Kinetic parameters such as activation energy, adsorption enthalpies of H 2 , and CO were estimated to be 65.0, −13.0, and −54.0 kJ/mol, respectively. Considering the developed kinetic model, the effects of reaction temperature and pressure were assessed on Fischer–Tropsch synthesis (FTS) product distribution. Additionally, the kinetic model was compared with the typical Anderson–Schulz–Flory model, suggesting the effects of water‐gas‐shift and the existence of additional formation pathway such as secondary re‐adsorption of olefins for heavier hydrocarbons.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207