↓ Skip to main content

Reversible Redox Effect on Gas Permeation of Cobalt Doped Ethoxy Polysiloxane (ES40) Membranes

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reversible Redox Effect on Gas Permeation of Cobalt Doped Ethoxy Polysiloxane (ES40) Membranes
Published in
Scientific Reports, April 2013
DOI 10.1038/srep01648
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher R. Miller, David K. Wang, Simon Smart, João C. Diniz da Costa

Abstract

This work reports the remarkable effect of reversible gas molecular sieving for high temperature gas separation from cobalt doped ethoxy polysiloxane (CoES40) membranes. This effect stemmed from alternating the reducing and oxidising (redox) state of the cobalt particles embedded in the ES40 matrix. The reduced membranes gave the best H2 permeances of 1 × 10(-6) mol m(-2) s(-1) Pa(-1) and H2/N2 permselectivities of 65. The reduction process tailored a molecular gap attributed to changes in the specific volume between the reduced cobalt (Co(OH)2 and CoO) particles in the ES40 structure, thus allowing for the increased diffusion of gases. Upon re-oxidation, the tailored molecular gap became constricted as the particles reversed to Co3O4 resulting a lower gas diffusion, particularly for the larger gases ie. CO2 and N2. The ES40 matrix proved to be structurally rigid enough to withstand the reversible redox effect of cobalt particles across multiple cycles.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 18 56%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 8 25%
Chemical Engineering 7 22%
Unknown 17 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2013.
All research outputs
#14,623,075
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#71,022
of 122,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,166
of 199,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#308
of 475 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 122,340 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 199,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 475 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.