4.6 Article

Surfactant-assisted synthesis of mesoporous silica/ceria-silica composites with high cerium content under basic conditions

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
卷 1, 期 40, 页码 12595-12605

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3ta12482g

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP)
  2. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy of Korea [20113020030040]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  4. Ministry of Education [2012000855]
  5. National Science Foundation [CHE-0848352]
  6. MSIP
  7. POSTECH
  8. [NRF-2012-R1A2A1A-05026313]
  9. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  10. Division Of Chemistry [0848352] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ordered mesoporous silica/ceria-silica composites were synthesized using cerium(IV) hydroxide and tetraethyl orthosilicate (TEOS) as co-precursors in the presence of hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) under basic conditions. These composites consisted of Ce-doped mesoporous silica particles (about 500 nm) with highly ordered 2D hexagonal (p6mm) and 3D bicontinuous cubic (Ia3d) structures and irregular ceria-rich silica-ceria particles. Wide angle XRD, diffuse reflectance UV-vis, and XPS analyses showed that 10-24% of cerium was at the Ce3+ oxidation level and the remaining predominant fraction of Ce was at the Ce4+ oxidation level. The cerium loading was varied in these composite materials up to 43 wt% (similar to 3.1 mmol g(-1)). The specific surface areas of the mesoporous silica/ceria-silica composite samples obtained on the basis of nitrogen adsorption isotherms were higher than 350 m(2) g(-1) and their pore widths were between 3.3 and 3.5 nm. The mesoporous silica/ceria-silica samples were reduced at 850 degrees C under flowing H-2 in a N-2 environment. The crystal structure of the reduced samples changed to a hexagonally structured phase with the oxidation state of Ce3+, while the ordered mesostructure of silica was preserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据