BET SA and Microporous Materials - equipment/software for MOFs

  • Thread starter Thread starter amanda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Surface area
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on measuring the surface area and pore volume of Metal-Organic Frameworks (MOFs) using BET surface area analysis. The participants express a need for better understanding and tools to automate the process, as current methods involve manual calculations that are inefficient. Anton Paar's system is mentioned as a potential solution, but the search for superior alternatives is ongoing. The conversation highlights the importance of having the right equipment and software to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of measurements in mesoporous materials.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of BET surface area analysis techniques
  • Familiarity with Metal-Organic Frameworks (MOFs)
  • Knowledge of pore volume measurement methods
  • Experience with analytical equipment for material characterization
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Anton Paar's BET surface area analyzers for MOFs
  • Explore alternative software solutions for automated data analysis in material science
  • Investigate advanced techniques for measuring pore volume in mesoporous materials
  • Learn about the latest developments in MOF characterization technologies
USEFUL FOR

Material scientists, researchers in nanotechnology, and professionals involved in the characterization of mesoporous materials and MOFs.

amanda
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
My lab is trying to apply BET SA to microporous materials (MOFs, Zeolites) - this doesn't work! I don't have the background to recommend a diff. approach or diff. equipment and I need help.
We've been measuring mesoporous material for years, but no one has the background to really dissect what the test does or what data is results in. We mainly just use it for comparisons.

We are newly working with MOF and trying to measure their surface area and pore volume. I've become our new expert after two hours of reading, but I just don't have the background to know what software/equipment/approach might work better. I've decreased our p/p0 range and seem to be getting okay results but I don't want to puzzle it out manually for every new material we screen.

I know Anton Paar has a system to get around this, but do you or another company have a better answer?
 

Similar threads

Admissions Could I please get critique on my SOP? (Experimental Biophysics)
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
896
Graduate How cross-section area of single E-M wave looks like?
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
11K
Job Skills Got my BS in Physics but I don't know what to apply for
  • · Replies 108 ·
4
Replies
108
Views
19K
Graduate BRS: PKI Cryptosystems for SA/Ms: A Tutorial
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Graduate It's a rate (not a constant) so let's call it that
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Teaching Physics with Inquiry: Challenges & Solutions
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
16K
Graduate Birefringence and Automotive Window Tinting
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
8K
The career path becomes foggy on which direction to go
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
A sci-fi trilogy background. real science advice needed PLEASE
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Graduate Sifting through the first quarter 2010 papers
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K