Gas adsorption for (BET) surface area of graphene oxide based thin films

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges faced in measuring the BET surface area of reduced graphene oxide (rGO) thin films using gas adsorption techniques. Participants explore potential reasons for obtaining negative volumes of adsorbate during nitrogen adsorption isotherm measurements, including sample preparation and apparatus issues.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant reports negative volumes of nitrogen adsorbed during measurements, despite proper sample preparation and degassing.
  • Another participant suggests checking for air leaks in the apparatus, as this could lead to inaccurate adsorption values.
  • A participant expresses confidence in the absence of leaks, citing successful tests with activated carbon, and proposes that thermal or diffusion issues may be affecting the rGO sample.
  • Concerns are raised about the appropriateness of using activated carbon for leak testing due to its high specific surface area, which could mask leak effects.
  • Suggestions include extending the degassing time and mixing the rGO sample with an inert powder to improve heat transfer and obtain more reliable adsorption results.
  • Participants discuss the possibility of graphene sheets restacking, which could affect the expected surface area of the rGO material.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the cause of the negative adsorption values. Multiple competing views regarding potential issues with the sample and the measurement apparatus remain present.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the importance of sample preparation and the potential impact of thermal conditions and diffusion on the adsorption measurements. There is uncertainty regarding the specific surface area of the rGO and the effects of sample outgassing.

Who May Find This Useful

Researchers and practitioners involved in material science, specifically those working with gas adsorption techniques and surface area measurements of nanomaterials.

mic*
Messages
99
Reaction score
11
I am using a Micromeretics ASAP2020 machine. The sample is ~25mg of reduced graphene oxide based film.

The problem is I am getting adsorption isotherms showing negative volumes of adsorbate (N2) entering the tube as P/P0 increases.

The sample was degassed prior to testing at 250°C for 3 hours then backfilled with N2. As a side note, TGA says the sample retains >99% mass up to 400°C.

Any ideas kind people?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Check your apparatus for air leaks. Replace the O rings if necessary. Air slowly leaking into the instrument would reduce the apparent drop in pressure due to adsorption, giving you low adsorption values - in extreme cases, negative values. I have encountered this problem occasionally.
 
Thanks for the advice mjc123. I am pretty sure I have no leaks. I ran an activated carbon sample for comparison and it produced a lovely microporous isotherm.

There is something going on with the sample. I thought perhaps it was thermally related. The sample itself consists of little chopped up pieces of film. My thought was that maybe it is not getting cold enough because there is limited mechanism for heat transfer from the sample to the N2 bath. Otherwise I was thinking it was diffusion related? But I am a bit stuck.

I have run this material numerous times with virtually zero or else actual negative values of gas adsorbed. How can one explain the negative volumes if not through sample outgassing?
 
I wouldn't use an activated carbon to check for leaks. The specific surface area tends to be very high, and the amount of nitrogen adsorbed by the sample dwarfs the amount admitted via a leak. Leaks show up most with low surface area samples. What is the expected SSA of your graphene oxide, do you know? However, if you're sure there isn't a leak, then I can't think of anything other than sample outgassing. Have you tried degassing for longer before the experiment? I usually degas carbons overnight at 300°C - will your sample stand this? If you're worried about heat transfer, why not mix your sample with some inert (non-reacting, even at the degassing temperature of 300°C) powder of much lower specific surface area? Then if you get a sensible answer, divide it by the mass fraction of graphene oxide in your mixture.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mic*
TGA suggests it will be fine so I am actually doing that already :)

I expect it to be a high SSA material - the rGO. Unless all the graphene sheets have restacked, which is possible but not probable. But I see ypur point. I might run the same size sample of graphite as a comparison. Cheers
 

Similar threads

3D Graphene foam from glucose by chemical blowing
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
Chemically regenerating my auto's catalytic converter?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
9K