An International Laboratory Comparison Study of Volumetric and Gravimetric Hydrogen Adsorption Measurements

Katherine Hurst; Thomas Gennett; Philip Parilla; Jesse Adams; Mark Allendorf; Rafael Balderas-Xicohtencatl; Marek Bielewski; Bryce Edwards; Laura Espinal; Brent Fultz; Michael Hirscher; M. Sterlin Hudson; Zeric Hulvey; Michel LaTroche; Di-Jia Liu; Matthew Kapelewski; Emilio Napolitano; Zachary Perry; Justin Purewal; Vitalie Stavila; Mike Veenstra; James White; Yuping Yuan; Hong-Cai Zhou; Claudia Zlotea

doi:10.1002/cphc.201900166

An International Laboratory Comparison Study of Volumetric and Gravimetric Hydrogen Adsorption Measurements

Katherine Hurst, Thomas Gennett, Philip Parilla, Jesse Adams, Mark Allendorf, Rafael Balderas-Xicohtencatl, Marek Bielewski, Bryce Edwards, Laura Espinal, Brent Fultz, Michael Hirscher, M. Sterlin Hudson, Zeric Hulvey, Michel LaTroche, Di-Jia Liu, Matthew Kapelewski, Emilio Napolitano, Zachary Perry, Justin Purewal, Vitalie StavilaMike Veenstra, James White, Yuping Yuan, Hong-Cai Zhou, Claudia Zlotea

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

32 Scopus Citations

Abstract

In order to determine a material's hydrogen storage potential, capacity measurements must be robust, reproducible, and accurate. Commonly, research reports focus on the gravimetric capacity, and often times the volumetric capacity is not reported. Determining volumetric capacities is not as straight-forward, especially for amorphous materials. This is the first study to compare measurement reproducibility across laboratories for excess and total volumetric hydrogen sorption capacities based on the packing volume. The use of consistent measurement protocols, common analysis, and figure of merits for reporting data in this study, enable the comparison of the results for two different materials. Importantly, the results show good agreement for excess gravimetric capacities amongst the laboratories. Irreproducibility for excess and total volumetric capacities is attributed to real differences in the measured packing volume of the material.

Original language	American English
Pages (from-to)	1997-2009
Number of pages	13
Journal	ChemPhysChem
Volume	20
Issue number	15
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201900166 https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201900166
State	Published - 2019

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

NREL Publication Number

NREL/JA-5900-74226

Keywords

comparative measurement study
excess capacity
hydrogen storage measurement
volumetric capacity

Access to Document

Cite this

Hurst, K., Gennett, T., Parilla, P., Adams, J., Allendorf, M., Balderas-Xicohtencatl, R., Bielewski, M., Edwards, B., Espinal, L., Fultz, B., Hirscher, M., Hudson, M. S., Hulvey, Z., LaTroche, M., Liu, D.-J., Kapelewski, M., Napolitano, E., Perry, Z., Purewal, J., ... Zlotea, C. (2019). An International Laboratory Comparison Study of Volumetric and Gravimetric Hydrogen Adsorption Measurements. ChemPhysChem, 20(15), 1997-2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201900166, https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201900166

@article{c8b4a25a2a3b4ac491ab5f3adae36e90,

title = "An International Laboratory Comparison Study of Volumetric and Gravimetric Hydrogen Adsorption Measurements",

abstract = "In order to determine a material's hydrogen storage potential, capacity measurements must be robust, reproducible, and accurate. Commonly, research reports focus on the gravimetric capacity, and often times the volumetric capacity is not reported. Determining volumetric capacities is not as straight-forward, especially for amorphous materials. This is the first study to compare measurement reproducibility across laboratories for excess and total volumetric hydrogen sorption capacities based on the packing volume. The use of consistent measurement protocols, common analysis, and figure of merits for reporting data in this study, enable the comparison of the results for two different materials. Importantly, the results show good agreement for excess gravimetric capacities amongst the laboratories. Irreproducibility for excess and total volumetric capacities is attributed to real differences in the measured packing volume of the material.",

keywords = "comparative measurement study, excess capacity, hydrogen storage measurement, volumetric capacity",

author = "Katherine Hurst and Thomas Gennett and Philip Parilla and Jesse Adams and Mark Allendorf and Rafael Balderas-Xicohtencatl and Marek Bielewski and Bryce Edwards and Laura Espinal and Brent Fultz and Michael Hirscher and Hudson, {M. Sterlin} and Zeric Hulvey and Michel LaTroche and Di-Jia Liu and Matthew Kapelewski and Emilio Napolitano and Zachary Perry and Justin Purewal and Vitalie Stavila and Mike Veenstra and James White and Yuping Yuan and Hong-Cai Zhou and Claudia Zlotea",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim",

year = "2019",

doi = "10.1002/cphc.201900166",

language = "American English",

volume = "20",

pages = "1997--2009",

journal = "ChemPhysChem",

issn = "1439-4235",

publisher = "Wiley-VCH Verlag",

number = "15",

}

Hurst, K , Gennett, T , Parilla, P, Adams, J, Allendorf, M, Balderas-Xicohtencatl, R, Bielewski, M, Edwards, B, Espinal, L, Fultz, B, Hirscher, M, Hudson, MS, Hulvey, Z, LaTroche, M, Liu, D-J, Kapelewski, M, Napolitano, E, Perry, Z, Purewal, J, Stavila, V, Veenstra, M, White, J, Yuan, Y, Zhou, H-C & Zlotea, C 2019, 'An International Laboratory Comparison Study of Volumetric and Gravimetric Hydrogen Adsorption Measurements', ChemPhysChem, vol. 20, no. 15, pp. 1997-2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201900166, https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201900166

TY - JOUR

T1 - An International Laboratory Comparison Study of Volumetric and Gravimetric Hydrogen Adsorption Measurements

AU - Hurst, Katherine

AU - Gennett, Thomas

AU - Parilla, Philip

AU - Adams, Jesse

AU - Allendorf, Mark

AU - Balderas-Xicohtencatl, Rafael

AU - Bielewski, Marek

AU - Edwards, Bryce

AU - Espinal, Laura

AU - Fultz, Brent

AU - Hirscher, Michael

AU - Hudson, M. Sterlin

AU - Hulvey, Zeric

AU - LaTroche, Michel

AU - Liu, Di-Jia

AU - Kapelewski, Matthew

AU - Napolitano, Emilio

AU - Perry, Zachary

AU - Purewal, Justin

AU - Stavila, Vitalie

AU - Veenstra, Mike

AU - White, James

AU - Yuan, Yuping

AU - Zhou, Hong-Cai

AU - Zlotea, Claudia

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - In order to determine a material's hydrogen storage potential, capacity measurements must be robust, reproducible, and accurate. Commonly, research reports focus on the gravimetric capacity, and often times the volumetric capacity is not reported. Determining volumetric capacities is not as straight-forward, especially for amorphous materials. This is the first study to compare measurement reproducibility across laboratories for excess and total volumetric hydrogen sorption capacities based on the packing volume. The use of consistent measurement protocols, common analysis, and figure of merits for reporting data in this study, enable the comparison of the results for two different materials. Importantly, the results show good agreement for excess gravimetric capacities amongst the laboratories. Irreproducibility for excess and total volumetric capacities is attributed to real differences in the measured packing volume of the material.

AB - In order to determine a material's hydrogen storage potential, capacity measurements must be robust, reproducible, and accurate. Commonly, research reports focus on the gravimetric capacity, and often times the volumetric capacity is not reported. Determining volumetric capacities is not as straight-forward, especially for amorphous materials. This is the first study to compare measurement reproducibility across laboratories for excess and total volumetric hydrogen sorption capacities based on the packing volume. The use of consistent measurement protocols, common analysis, and figure of merits for reporting data in this study, enable the comparison of the results for two different materials. Importantly, the results show good agreement for excess gravimetric capacities amongst the laboratories. Irreproducibility for excess and total volumetric capacities is attributed to real differences in the measured packing volume of the material.

KW - comparative measurement study

KW - excess capacity

KW - hydrogen storage measurement

KW - volumetric capacity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068150312&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/cphc.201900166

DO - 10.1002/cphc.201900166

M3 - Article

C2 - 31177637

AN - SCOPUS:85068150312

SN - 1439-4235

VL - 20

SP - 1997

EP - 2009

JO - ChemPhysChem

JF - ChemPhysChem

IS - 15

ER -

An International Laboratory Comparison Study of Volumetric and Gravimetric Hydrogen Adsorption Measurements

Abstract

Bibliographical note

NREL Publication Number

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this