Methane storage in molecular nanostructures
Nanoscale, ISSN: 2040-3364, Vol: 4, Issue: 11, Page: 3295-3307
2012
- 27Citations
- 34Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations27
- Citation Indexes27
- 27
- CrossRef25
- Captures34
- Readers34
- 34
Review Description
We survey various molecular structures which have been proposed as possible nanocontainers for methane storage. These are molecular structures that have been investigated through either experiments, molecular dynamics simulations or mathematical modelling. Computational simulation and mathematical modelling play an important role in predicting and verifying experimental outcomes, but both have their limitations. Even though recent advances have greatly improved computations, due to the large number of atoms and force field calculations involved, computational simulations can still be time consuming as compared to an instantaneous mathematical modelling approach. On the other hand, underlying an ideal mathematical model, there are many assumptions and approximations, but such modelling often reveals the key physical parameters and optimal configurations. Here, we review methane adsorption for three conventional nanostructures, namely graphite, single and multi-walled carbon nanotubes, and nanotube bundles (including interstitial and groove sites), and we survey methane adsorption in other molecular structures including metal organic frameworks. We also include an examination of minimum binding energies, equilibrium distances, gravimetric and volumetric uptakes, volume available for adsorption, as well as the effects of temperature and pressure on the adsorption of methane onto these molecular structures. © 2012 The Royal Society of Chemistry.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84861357077&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c2nr00042c; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22538768; https://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI=c2nr00042c; https://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c2nr00042c; https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2012/nr/c2nr00042c
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know