Scribd
Upload
1K views3 pages

IUPAC AMPs Questions

The IUPAC recommends classifying pores according to size as: micropores (<2nm), mesopores (2-50nm) and macropores (>50nm). This classification is based on differences in adsorption behavior, with capillary condensation in mesopores and enhanced adsorption in micropores. While simple, it is disconnected from SI units and biased towards small pores. Alternatively, Mays (2006) proposed nanopores (0.1-100nm), micropores (0.1-100um) and millipores (0.1-100mm) using SI prefixes, addressing IUPAC limitations but introducing its own issues.

Uploaded by

tunabeast
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views3 pages

IUPAC AMPs Questions

The IUPAC recommends classifying pores according to size as: micropores (<2nm), mesopores (2-50nm) and macropores (>50nm). This classification is based on differences in adsorption behavior, with capillary condensation in mesopores and enhanced adsorption in micropores. While simple, it is disconnected from SI units and biased towards small pores. Alternatively, Mays (2006) proposed nanopores (0.1-100nm), micropores (0.1-100um) and millipores (0.1-100mm) using SI prefixes, addressing IUPAC limitations but introducing its own issues.

Uploaded by

tunabeast
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Describe the current scheme recommended by IUPAC to classify pores in solids according to their size.

The description should be should clearly state the physical principles upon which the scheme is based. State the main advantages and disadvantages of the scheme. Alternative pore size classification schemes do not need to be mentioned. Micropores have width < 2nm Mesopores 2-50 nm Macropores > 50nm

Everett suggested in 1972 the term mesopore rather than transitional (or intermediate) pore, and that the micropore-mesopore and mesopore-macropore boundaries should be 2 and 50 nm respectively, with the general idea (after Brunauer and Dubinin) that fluids in macropores behave as on free or external surfaces, capillary condensation occurs in mesopores and that adsorption in micropores occurs by a filling process partly influenced by fluid molecules being about the same size as the pores.. Gregg and Sing [13] subsequently adopted Everett's classification, and reinforced Dubinin's ideas that micropores were also characterised by enhanced adsorption due to the overlap of interaction potentials from opposite pore walls. Advantages People who classified sizes were at the heart of the porous solids industry at the time, and making big discoveries in the field. This was most appropriate for their work at the time IUPAC classification of pore sizes is relatively simple, with just 3 pore size classification groups Related to regions where different physio chemical reactions take place Classification has been improved and updated over the past 40 years Disadvantages of IUPAC system Term micropore is unrelated to the SI unit micrometre - IUPAC pore classification scheme defined before SI prefixes became popular, so those new to the IUPAC classification may initially be confused that micropore has nothing to do with SI. Mesopore or macropore have no links with SI, or any other conventions Can cause confusion where common SI related terms such as nanotechnology are applied to porous solids Nanopores are not mentioned in the current IUPAC classification. The scientific interest in nanopores has since far exceeded that in micropores, and since IUPAC does not recognize this it may lead to confusion amongst researchers who are used to using SI prefixes. Biased towards small pores Mays has proposed a new classification of pore sizes as follows Nanopore 0.1-100nm Micropore 0.1-100um Millipore 0.1-100mm Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this scheme compared with the current classification of pore sizes recommended by IUPAC IUPAC Micropores have width < 2nm Mesopores 2-50 nm Macropores > 50nm Submicro - <0.4um Ultramicropore - <0.7um Supermicropore 0.7-2um Micropore - <2um Mesopore 2-50um Macropore - >50um Term micropore is unrelated to the SI unit micrometre IUPAC pore classification scheme defined before SI Uses SI prefixes Mays Nanopore 0.1-100nm Micropore 0.1-100um Millipore 0.1-100mm

prefixes became popular, so those new to the IUPAC classification may initially be confused that micropore has nothing to do with SI. Biased towards small pores Classification has been improved and updated over the past 40 years Larger range of pore sizes The scientific interest in nanopores has since far exceeded that in micropores, and since IUPAC does not recognize this it may lead to confusion amongst researchers who are used to using SI prefixes. Mays uses SI prefixes to fix this confusion. The new classification is entirely decoupled from any physic-chemical system or process and is not biased towards small pores. Rigid but more difficult pore size classification. Due to the three orders of magnitude of pore size covered which would be too much of a broad range. - Although the use of it follows from standard Latin phrases (sub, inter, super) Incompatible with IUPAC due to micropore included in both Terms Millipore and micropore are commercial company names

Derived from physical adsorption phenomena in pores narrower than 50nm. IUPAC classification of pore sizes is relatively simple, with just 3 pore size classification groups

Mesopore or macropore have no links with SI, or any other conventions

Describe the pore size classification system that is currently recommended by IUPAC. Your description should include details of the underlying scientific principles of the system and a brief statement of common equations used to analyse adsorption in different pore size classes in the system Summarise the IUPAC pore size classification systems main strengths and weaknesses. You do not need to refer to alternative pore size classifications BET

Langmuir

Linearized form:

Summarise the IUPAC classification of pore sizes. Describe how the different pore size classes are related to adsorption processes. Compare the advantages and disadvantages of the IUPAC pore size classification and the pore size classification proposed by Mays in 2006.

You might also like