4.4 Article

Improvement of water vapor adsorption ability of natural mesoporous material by impregnating with chloride salts for development of a new desiccant filter

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10450-011-9363-1

关键词

Water adsorption; Siliceous shale; Desiccant; Impregnation; Sodium chloride

资金

  1. New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) of Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study is the development of a new adsorbent for the desiccant material which can be regenerated by the domestic exhaust heat by using natural mesoporous material, Wakkanai siliceous shale. To improve this shale's performance to adsorb/desorb the water vapor, lithium chloride, calcium chloride or sodium chloride was supported into the mesopores by impregnating with each chloride solution. Especially sodium chloride was effective to increase the water vapor adsorption amount 5-7 times of that of natural shale in the relative humidity range from 50 to 70%. Moreover, the appropriate impregnating concentrations were determined as 5wt% from the relationship between the maximum water vapor adsorption amount and the mesopore volume. Based on these results, a new desiccant filter has been developed by impregnated original paper with lithium chloride and sodium chloride. This paper contained shale powder in the synthetic fibers. The dehumidification performance of this filter was evaluated under the simulated summer condition in Tokyo. From the cyclic adsorption/regeneration test, this shale and chlorides filter could adsorb and desorb 60 g/h water vapor repeatedly at the regeneration temperature of 40A degrees C. On the other hand, a silica gel filter and a zeolite filter adsorbed and desorbed only 10 g/h and 25 g/h, respectively. These results suggested that the shale impregnated with the chlorides has the best dehumidification ability as a new desiccant material. Further, the desiccant filter made from the shale will achieve the effective use of the low temperature exhaust heat.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据