No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Electron Microscopic Replica Studies of Porosity in Fused Iron Catalysts
1.Hall, Tarn, and Anderson, J. Am. Chem. Soc. (to be published).
2.Anderson, Shultz, Seligman, Hall, and Storch, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 72, 3502 (1950).
3.R. C. Williams and R. W. G. Wyckoff, J. Appl. Phys. 17, 23 (1946).
4.C. H. Gerould, J. Appl. Phys. 18, 333 (1947).
5.V. J. Schaefer and D. Harker, J. Appl. Phys. 13, 427 (1942).
6.R. D. Heidenreich and L. A. Matheson, J. Appl. Phys. 15, 423 (1944).
7.Deacon, Ellis, Cross, and Sennett, J. Appl. Phys. 19, 704 (1948).
8.R. D. Heidenreich, J. Appl. Phys. 14, 312 (1943).
9.It should be emphasized that in this method the pore volume to surface area ratio is determined, and the estimation of an average pore diameter involves an assumption of the type of pore system. For example, for a pore of cylindrical or square cross section, where đ is the average pore diameter or length of a side of the square, V the pore volume, and A the surface area. If one side of the square pore is increased indefinitely, the equation becomes where đ is the separation between two parallel plates. These examples illustrate the fact that the smaller dimension of a pore opening is the most significant in determining its pore volume‐area ratio.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month