Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-hn9fh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-07T07:22:31.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Statistical Derivation of Langmuir's Adsorption Isotherm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

R. H. Fowler*
Affiliation:
Trinity College
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The commonest form of Langmuir's adsorption isotherm is

where θ is the fraction of the surface of the solid covered by adsorbed molecules, p the gas pressure in equilibrium with the adsorbed layer and A = A (T) a function of the temperature alone. This formula is usually derived by a kinetic argument which balances the rates of deposition and re-evaporation. It is perhaps not without interest to show that formula (1) and similar formulae can be obtained directly by the usual statistical methods which evaluate all the properties of the equilibrium state of any assembly. The ordinary derivation is apt to obscure the essentially thermodynamic character of (1) and to lead one to think that its form depends on the precise mechanisms of deposition and re-evaporation, whereas in fact it depends only on the whole set of states, adsorbed and free, accessible to the molecules in question. By suitable use of the usual technique for handling assemblies obeying the Fermi-Dirac statistics the saturation effect can be naturally incorporated in the theory ab initio.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1935

References

* See for example, Fowler, , Statistical Mechanics (1929), § 21·4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

* It will be sufficiently obvious that in this section the superior affix 2 refers to the second type of system and does not denote a square.

Equations equivalent to these or their generalizations were first given by kinetic arguments by Henry, , Phil. Mag. 44 (1922), 689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar