Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The gas-absorption/chemical-reaction (GACR) method used in Chemical Engineering to quantify gas-liquid interfacial area in reactor systems is adapted for the first time to measure the effective air-water interfacial area of natural porous media. Experiments were conducted with the GACR method, and two standard methods (x-ray microtomographic imaging and interfacial partitioning tracer tests) for comparison, using model glass beads and a natural sand. The results of a series of experiments conducted under identical conditions demonstrated that the GACR method exhibited excellent repeatability for maintaining constant water saturation and for measurement of interfacial area (A). Coefficients of variation for A were 3.5% for the glass beads and 11% for the sand. Estimated maximum interfacial areas (A) obtained with the GACR method were statistically identical to independent measures of the specific solid surface areas of the media. For example, the A for the glass beads is 29 (±1) cm, compared to 32 (±3), 30 (±2), and 31 (±2) cm determined from geometric calculation, N2/BET measurement, and microtomographic measurement, respectively. This indicates that the method produced accurate measures of interfacial area. Interfacial areas determined with the GACR method were similar to those obtained with the standard methods. For example, As of 47 and 44 cm were measured with the GACR and XMT methods, respectively, for the sand at a water saturation of 0.57. The results of the study indicate that the GACR method is a viable alternative for measuring air-water interfacial areas. The method is relatively quick, inexpensive, and requires no specialized instrumentation compared to the standard methods.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5898451 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021717 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!