Name: ONG CARRIE

Date: 20 October 2013

Week 2

1.0 Literature Review

1.1 Article 1: Solar Drying

1.1.1 What is/are the discoveries?

a. Principles of Drying
 In the process of drying, heat is necessary to evaporate moisture from the material and
a flow of air helps in carrying away the evaporated moisture. There are two basic
mechanisms involved in the drying process: the migration of moisture from the interior of an
individual material to the surface, and the evaporation of moisture from the surface to the
surrounding air.

The drying of a product is a complex heat and mass transfer process which depends
on external variables such as temperature, humidity and velocity of the air stream and internal
variables which depend on parameters like surface characteristics (rough or smooth surface),
chemical composition (sugars, starches, etc.), physical structure(porosity, density, etc.), and
size and shape of products. The rate of moisture movement from the product inside to the air
outside differs from one product to another and depends very much on whether the material is
hygroscopic or non-hygroscopic. Non-hygroscopic materials can be dried to zero moisture
level while the hygroscopic materials like most of the food products will always have residual
moisture content. This moisture, in hygroscopic material, may be bound moisture which
remained in the

24

material due to closed capillaries or due to surface forces and unbound moisture
which remained in the material due to the surface tension of water as shown in Figure 2.
How is it done? (Working principle)

Firstly, liquid is vaporized by supplying heat to the product. In most

cases (including solar dryers), heat will reach the boundaries of the
product. Then, the heat would diffuse into the solid product primarily by
conduction. The liquid must travel to the boundary of the material before it
is transported away by the carrier gas (or by application of vacuum for
non-convective dryers). Transport of moisture within the solid may occur
by any one or more of the following mechanisms of mass transfer:
 Data collection and analysis

From NMR data revealed that the amount of desorbed PSA was as low as 0.7%. This
confirming the strong interaction of PSA with CNT grapheme layers through - stacking.
Besides that, the result show that after 2 hour reaction, the TOF of PSA support on CNT is
higher than PSA alone. This show that highly hydrophobic nature of CNT surface with their
unique -conjugated system which favours a better approach of the aromatic based
reagents. After 3 runs of the experimental reaction, the yield of the product is still maintain
in 70-80%, however the yield of only using PSA alone is drop from 80% to 0%. This show
that the catalyst with CNT as support is more stable and can reuse quite many times. On the
other hand, the unsupported PSA is either the free PSA was partially removed from the
reaction mixture during the products extraction procedure or either was damaged in the
course of the catalytic reaction (Souquet-Grumey et al., n.d.). Thus, it can be conclude
that PSA with support of CNT not only simple to handle but also reusable and non-
destructive.
1.1.3 Any flaw with experimental section and the results?
This journal do not do comparison of parameter such as temperature and mole ratio.
Comparison in term of parameter can help reader to know the trend of the catalytic reaction
rate by changing different parameter. Is this mean any parameter will also get the same
amount of yield?

1.1.4 Are the data properly analyzed? Reproducible? Statistically analyzed?

This journal do not show the mechanism of the catalytic reaction. If it state clearly
the mechanism can help in understand well of the bonding part so that reader can
understand how the catalyst help in forming the product from reactants. Besides that, the
journal only using one type of solvent to get the final result. More comparison in term of
solvent may let readers to understand which type of solvent can get the highest yield of
product.

1.1.5 Did the author compare with other findings?

Yes, this journal is compare the MWCNT-PSA catalyst with carbonaceous Vulcan
XC75-PSA catalyst, Vulcan XC72-SO3H catalyst , with only PSA alone and without catalyst.
It compare the rate determined after 10 min of reaction and yields of product with the other
findings.

1.1.6 Are the conclusions supported by the data/findings?

Based on the conclusion generated in this paper, it state that by contrast to less
straightforward covalent chemical routes, non-covalent functionalization with aromatic
sulfonic acid through - interaction in order to prepare a reusable acid/CNT catalyst.
However, this journal do not show the data or finding to compare between covalent and
noncovalent.
1.1.7 What is the information that can be used for your research? Method?
Findings?
The information from the journal is regarding noncovalent functionalised multiwalled
carbon nanotubes as novel active and reusable acid catalyst that display diverse
pharmacological activates. However, since the catalyst is an acidic functional group and the
CNT and amorphous carbon is same production from carbon, therefore the method provide
in the journal is useful for synthesis for non-covalent functionalization amorphous carbon for
transesterification reaction.

1.2 Journal 2: Pyrene Sulfonate Functionalised Single-Walled Carbon Nanotube

for Mediatorless Dioxygen Bioeletrocatalyst (Jnsson-Niedziolka, Szot, Rogalski,
& Opallo, 2009)

1.2.1 What is/are the discoveries?

In this paper, it prepares electrodes using single-walled carbon nanotubes non-
covalently functionalised with 1,3,6,8-pyrenetetrasulfonate or 1-pyrenesulfonate immobilised
together with enzyme laccase in a silicate sol-gel matrix. These two pyrene (anions) bind to
the sidewalls of carbon nanotubes by - electron stacking. The negative charge of the
pyrene group help the dispersion of the CNTs through Coulomb repulsion. The catalyst
effectively for mediatorless bioeletrocatalysis. It is show that more than 2 times higher than
obtained with analogous electrode modified with raw single-walled carbon nanotubes which
is also mechanically unstable. The sulfonated group create higher catalytic current than the
without catalyst one. The sulfonic acid groups significantly enhance the DET electrocatalysis
which can use in the tranesterification catalytic reaction.

1.2.2 How is it done? (Method)

a. Procedure

1. CNT suspension in water was prepared by adding 2mg/mL of CNT to purified water
and sonicating with an ultrasonic finger for 1 hour.
2. The obtained amorphous dispersion was divided into 2 vessels :
A : 10mM PSA
B : 10mM PTSA
C : Distillate water
3. The vessels with added pyrene compound were sonicated in bath for 1 hour and left
over night.
4. After, the SWCNT dispersions were centrifuged at 17000g for 45 min.
5. The supernatant was replaced by equal amount of pure water.
6. The mixture is washed with 25uL of 1M phosphate buffer (pH4.8) and dried under
vacuum.
 b. Result and Analysis

No qualitative difference can be seen between the electrodes with and without
pyrene functionalization nanotubes. However, with functionalised SWCNT network enhances
the active surface and does not block the access to the electrodes, this increase the
quantities of the catalytic current.

It also state that TMOS/SWCNT/Lc electrodes are very unreliable and the catalytic
current varies from about 10-80 A cm-2. This film is also mechanically unstable and easily
gets loose from the ITO surface. On the other hand, the pyrene functionalization SWCNT
electrodes are reproducible and show significant higher catalytic current .

Besides that, for the TMOS/SWCNT/PSA/Lc the values were maximum current ,Imax
= 33.7+- 3.0 uA and Michaelis-Menten constant, Km= 2.5+-0.3mM and for
TMOS/SWCNT/PTSA/Lc Imax= 34.5+-1.9uA and Km=0.95+-0.08mM. PTSA supported
catalyst have higher catalytic current and and lower Km value. A high Km indicates that the
enzyme does not bind as efficiently with the substrate.

1.2.3 Any flaw with experimental section and the results?

This journal only determined which catalyst is better by compare the maximum
current and Michealis-Menten constant. It will be better if it compare the catalyst by
analysed with NMR to check the adsorption of pyreneacid into the solids. Besides that, those
FTIR, TGA and etc analysis should be done so that readers can understand well the
characteristic of the catalyst.

1.2.4 Are the data properly analyzed? Reproducible? Statistically analyzed?

The journal state clearly the procedure step from electrode preparation to
instrumentation and cell. However, it does not show any statistic on the parameter but only
discuss about the result. The manipulating parameter such as temperature, mole ratio and
different type of solvent used should analyse in a systematic form.
1.2.5 Did the authors compare with other findings?
In this paper, the author did compare the TMOS/SWCNT/Lc , TMOS/SWCNT/PSA/Lc
and TMOS/SWCNT/PTSA/Lc by using the maximum current and Michaelis-Menten Constant.

1.2.6 Are the conclusions supported by the data/ findings?

Based on the conclusion generated by the author, it state that electrode modified
with pyrenesulfonic acid functionalization SWCNT provide non-mediated catalytic current
towards dioxygen reduction by providing a figure ( over 100uAcm-2). Besides that, the
maximum current and Michaelis-Menten Constant also show that pyrenesulfonic acid have
significantly enhance the electrocatalysis.

1.2.7 What is the information that can be used for your research? Methods?
Findings?

The journal is discuss about preparation of electrodes using single walled carbon
nanotubes non-covalently functionalization with 1,3,6,8-pyrenesulfonate or 1-
pyrenesulfonate acid. Although it not state about the catalyst to produce biodiesel, the non-
covalent functionalization with sulfonated by both different chemical structure of
pyrenesulfonic acid is very useful on method of preparation of non-covalent functionalization
solid acid based catalyst for biodiesel. Besides that, here show that 1,3,6,8-pyrenesulfonate
acid are more higher catalytic power than 1-pyrenesulfonate acid had proven that higher
sulfonate group (-SO3H) will have higher catalytic power .

References :

Jnsson-Niedziolka, M., Szot, K., Rogalski, J., & Opallo, M. (2009). Pyrene sulfonate
functionalised single-walled carbon nanotubes for mediatorless dioxygen bioelectrocatalysis.
Electrochemistry Communications, 11(5), 10421044.

Souquet-Grumey, J., Plaisantin, H., Thbault, J., Jrme, F., Barrault, J., Tatibout,
J. M., & Valange, S. (n.d.). NON-COVALENTLY FUNCTIONALIZED MULTIWALLED CARBON
NANOTUBES AS NOVEL ACTIVE AND REUSABLE ACID CATALYSTS. Retrieved from
http://acs.omnibooksonline.com/data/papers/2010_074.pdf