Error evaluation of integral methods by consideration on the approximation of temperature integral

Liu, N; Chen, H; Shu, L; Statheropoulos, M

dc.contributor.author	Liu, N	en
dc.contributor.author	Chen, H	en
dc.contributor.author	Shu, L	en
dc.contributor.author	Statheropoulos, M	en
dc.date.accessioned	2014-03-01T01:54:35Z
dc.date.available	2014-03-01T01:54:35Z
dc.date.issued	2005	en
dc.identifier.issn	1388-6150	en
dc.identifier.uri	https://dspace.lib.ntua.gr/xmlui/handle/123456789/27440
dc.subject	error evaluation	en
dc.subject	kinetic analysis	en
dc.subject	temperature integral	en
dc.subject.classification	Chemistry, Analytical	en
dc.subject.classification	Chemistry, Physical	en
dc.subject.other	ISOTHERMAL KINETIC-PARAMETERS	en
dc.subject.other	NONISOTHERMAL REACTIONS	en
dc.subject.other	THERMAL-DECOMPOSITION	en
dc.subject.other	TGA DATA	en
dc.subject.other	FORMULA	en
dc.subject.other	INTERVALS	en
dc.title	Error evaluation of integral methods by consideration on the approximation of temperature integral	en
heal.type	journalArticle	en
heal.language	English	en
heal.publicationDate	2005	en
heal.abstract	In this paper, the integral methods in general use are divided into two types in terms of their different ways to in order to deal with the temperature integral p(x): for Type A the function h(x)=p(x)x(2)e(x) is regarded as constant vs. x, while for Type B h(x) varies vs. x and ln[p(x)] is assumed to have the approximation form of ln[p(x)]=alnx+bx+c (the coefficients a, b, and c are constant). The errors of kinetic parameters calculated by these two types of methods are derived as functions of x and analyzed theoretically. It is found that Type A methods have the common errors of activation energy, while the Coats-Redfern method can lead to more accurate value of frequency factor than others. The accuracy of frequency factor can be further enhanced by adjusting the expression of the Coats-Redfern approximation. Although using quite simple approximation of the temperature integral, the Coats-Redfern method has the best performance among Type A methods, implying that usage of a sophisticated approximation may be unnecessary in kinetic analysis. For Type B, the revised MKN method has a lower error in activation energy and an acceptable error in frequency factor, and thus it can be reliably used. Comparatively, the Doyle method has higher error of activation energy and great error of the frequency factor, and thus it is not recommended to be adopted in kinetic analysis.	en
heal.publisher	SPRINGER	en
heal.journalName	JOURNAL OF THERMAL ANALYSIS AND CALORIMETRY	en
dc.identifier.isi	ISI:000230263500016	en
dc.identifier.volume	81	en
dc.identifier.issue	1	en
dc.identifier.spage	99	en
dc.identifier.epage	105	en